Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-04-10-Speech-3-214"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2002-04-10"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Workers' exposure to asbestos2
dcterms:Language	"da"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20020410.7.3-214"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2002-04-10-Speech-3-2152
lpv:speaker	lp:Ulla Margrethe Sandbæk2
lpv:spokenAs	member; Committee on Development and Cooperation (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3 substitute; Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy (2002-01-17--2003-03-24)3 member; Delegation for relations with the Palestinian Legislative Council (2002-02-07--2004-07-19)3 substitute; EMPL (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3 unknown; JuniBevægelsen (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 member; EDD (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 member; Members from the European Parliament to the Joint Parliamentary Assembly of the Agreement between the African, Caribbean and Pacific States and the European Union (ACP-EU) (2002-02-06--2004-07-19)3 substitute; Committee on Foreign Affairs, Human Rights, Common Security and Defence Policy (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, I too should like to congratulate Mrs Damião on the report. I find it gratifying that, by means of its proposal, the Commission is now tightening up on the arrangements for protecting workers against the dangers of exposure to asbestos, which is of course a particularly dangerous substance, and I am therefore also able fully to support all the other features of the amendments designed to tighten matters up. As Mrs Thorning-Schmidt pointed out, there is still an unsolved problem in connection with the legislation on asbestos. This was highlighted at the meeting of the Employment and Social Policy Council of Ministers on 7 March 2002. The problem is that the ban, which is to be introduced in the EU from 2005, does not apply to the production of asbestos for third countries. I know that quite a few countries, including Denmark, Germany, Sweden and Finland, wanted the ban to be incorporated into the directive, but unfortunately there was only a minority at the meeting of the Employment and Social Policy Council of Ministers who endorsed that approach. I also know that the Commission has been reluctant to incorporate a direct ban into the directive itself on the grounds that to do so would not be to follow the normal procedure and might therefore cause legal problems. That is at any event what I have heard. If this is the case, I would urge the Commission to find another solution so that we can also obtain a ban on the production of asbestos for sale to third countries. When our own workers are required to take special precautions, the EU cannot of course defend exports to third countries which do not have the same resources to take their own precautions. It is, to put it bluntly, immoral, and I quite simply do not understand those Member States who cannot appreciate this. The EU should naturally cease such production. Moreover, workers involved in production for third countries would be exposed to asbestos whether the product were sold within or outside the EU. The EU is already notorious for its ambivalent rules in relation to third countries. A change to this directive so that it also includes a ban on production for, and exports to, third countries could be a good way to begin changing this state of affairs."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph