Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-02-27-Speech-3-183"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20020227.13.3-183"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
". – Mr President, I am very happy to be able to introduce my report at this evening's plenary session. Colleagues will recall that this is an own-initiative report and in our early discussions in committee some concerns were expressed about the potentially enormous scope of a report on such a broad subject as transport and health. We agreed that in order to be useful, we would need to prioritise the issues that we focussed on very rigorously.
Action in this field is urgent. Until we are prepared to give health concerns a major place in transport strategy, our children will go on paying for our inaction with their health, and increasingly with their lives.
For that reason I focussed this report on just two key issues: gaps in existing legislation and where further work can have genuine added value. First, the introduction of health impact assessments for all major EU transport projects and policies is probably the single most important initiative which could help integrate transport and health policies and help to minimise the negative impact of transport on health. The second issue I focussed on was the promotion within the bounds of subsidiarity of cycling and walking within EU transport policy. This would have an enormous impact on maximising the positive effects of transport policy on health.
To demonstrate why action is urgent and necessary, my report summarises some of the key negative health impacts arising from transport growth. These include air pollution, noise, lack of physical movement and others. To take just one of these, transport is now the dominant source of air pollution in urban areas and despite the past decade's improvements in air quality in Europe, close to 90% of the urban population is still exposed to excess ambient levels of particulate matter, NO2, benzene and ozone. These can affect respiratory functions and lead to other health problems and diseases like cancer and cardiovascular diseases.
Although it is true that vehicles have become relatively less polluting, the effect in absolute terms is offset by the increase in the number of vehicles on the road together with the increases in the length and frequencies of journeys. The significance of this was demonstrated by a recent study that found that air pollution now causes a higher mortality rate than road accidents.
This is also a very timely debate. New evidence from scientists in California in just the past few weeks demonstrates that car fumes can actually cause asthma rather than only exacerbating asthma in existing sufferers. New research in the UK, part-funded by the UK Government, reveals that children find it increasingly hard to breathe the closer they live to main roads.
So having focussed on two priority areas, I should explain the process used to identify those areas. First, on health impact assessments: in all the relevant literature it is clear there is still a lack of integration of health issues into transport policy at EU level. This was most recently and clearly evident in a synthesis report produced by the WHO and the UN Economic Commission for Europe in January of last year. That report was called for by European ministers to provide an overview of relevant existing agreements and to provide further recommendations. Their overwhelming conclusion was: "The main gap seems to lie in the lack of an overarching integration strategy which would bring together and use the synergies of policies and legislations relevant to transport, environment and health." We also have an EU Treaty obligation to better integrate these fields. Having spoken to a number of experts, it seems to me that health impact assessments should be introduced for all major EU transport policies and projects so that we can understand better the potential health risks and benefits of different proposals.
These analyses could be very helpfully integrated with strategic environmental assessments. This proposal actually complements and builds on proposals that are currently being considered in the Commission's proposal for a new programme of Community action in the field of public health. What I am proposing is that this commitment should now be implemented urgently as regards transport and health.
Some people will say that this methodology is not yet ready to be implemented. I would counter that very strongly. While this methodology, like all methodology, is still evolving there is more than enough knowledge to start implementing now. We need to be very clear about that.
The other part of my report focuses on promoting cycling and walking within the bounds of subsidiarity. I make a number of proposals which would help to promote those modes of transport in the EU. But I want to finish by coming back to an amendment that I notice that the PSE has tabled to the report which will have the effect of delaying the start of the health impact assessment until 2004. I regret that amendment since the methodologies exist for starting this process now. There is really no need to wait three years until the Commission comes up simply with proposals. For that reason, I will be making an oral amendment, which I understand has been agreed to by the PSE, to change the year 2004 to 2003. I hope very much that the other groups will accept that too."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples