Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-04-09-Speech-2-256"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2002-04-09"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Electrical and electronic equipment2
dcterms:Language	"es"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20020409.11.2-256"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2002-04-09-Speech-2-2572
lpv:speaker	lp:Cristina García-orcoyen Tormo2
lpv:spokenAs	substitute; Committee on Industry, External Trade, Research and Energy (2002-01-30--2004-07-19)3 unknown; Partido Popular (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 member; Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3 member; EPP-ED (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 substitute; Temporary committee on foot and mouth disease (2002-01-17--2002-12-17)3 member; Delegation for relations with the countries of south-east Europe (2002-03-07--2002-05-07)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, the two proposals we are debating tonight – which I agree are taking place far too late, given their importance – are pertinent for a variety of reasons. Firstly, because they are going to test the capacity and will of the electrics and electronics sector to maintain an attitude of active commitment to the protection of the environment, but also because they are going to test the capacity and will of the European institutions, Parliament in particular, to take a realistic and coherent approach, that can be adopted by the industry. The rapporteur, Mr Florenz, has had a difficult task in his attempt to produce a solid and effective proposal that can be accepted by all parties concerned. Now, as is apparent from this debate, in dealing with a complex and pioneering initiative in this field, there are still, in my opinion, many gaps and problems coming to light in its practical application. Two of these are of particular concern to me. One such example is consumables, such as those that have been mentioned here tonight. I believe that if we use this concept in an excessively wide sense we will be jeopardising those Member States who already have collection systems in place, in breaking up existing re-use circuits, inasmuch as we would be favouring recycling over re-use, before asking ourselves the question whether we are favouring the most ecologically sound system. Secondly, I would like to refer to ‘free-riders’. I believe that the compromise amendment presented is an appropriate solution, given that it did not seem logical that, taking the issue of individual financial responsibility as an example, we should have to make product manufacturers who disappear from the market or those who refuse to be identified responsible for their actions. I think we should take on a demanding approach with manufacturers who do not face up to their responsibilities with regard to waste, in order to defend those responsible manufacturers who have no reason to take on costs caused by these ‘free-riders’."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph