Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-01-16-Speech-3-194"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20020116.13.3-194"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, by bringing together several sectoral directives such as those on climate change and waste management, the Commission is seeking to launch an innovative programme to improve the environment. The end result is a real labyrinth that is incomprehensible to the citizen. However, the Council has again adopted a more realistic position by not setting a binding timetable or target. So what does the rapporteur want? Is it realistic, for instance, to incorporate the substitution principle, which currently has no political or legal definition?
There are also issues surrounding environmental crime, environmentally related taxes and legislation on environmental responsibility. We should also be in step with the resolution that was adopted last November relating to chemicals. These issues, which are crucial for our economy, cannot be dealt with hurriedly within the framework of this report. I am also concerned by the emphasis placed on biodiversity, with the headache involved in setting up the Natura 2000 network, both in France and elsewhere.
The approach to this subject is not correct either and there are alternatives. We shall therefore vote in favour of rejecting the amendment as a whole. Let us remain realistic and pragmatic. Let us go back to the main aims of the Sixth Environmental Action Programme, namely to ensure a high level of protection, taking into account the subsidiarity principle and diversity in the various regions of the Community. To do this, in my view, is already a fair challenge."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples