Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-05-29-Speech-3-170"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20020529.12.3-170"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, more than 10 years ago, Directive 91/414 concerning the authorisation, use and control of plant protection products entered into force. Admittedly, it was clear beforehand that the implementation of this directive would be a complex task, but you will agree with me that the fruits of 10 years of labour are very disappointing. Indeed, less than four percent of all active ingredients that need to be assessed have fully undergone the procedure. At this rate, the task will not be completed until the 22nd century.
Furthermore, it appears that a number of important assessment aspects have been overlooked. The use of additives which boost the effect of plant protection products springs to mind. For example, agriculture in the Netherlands adds 1 500 tonnes of chemical additives to 3 600 tonnes of pesticides annually, the effect of which on the public and the environment is unknown. In addition, an assessment criterion for drinking water originating from surface water is lacking. Practice has shown that the pursuit of the sustainable production of drinking water is hindered by the lack of sustainability in the use of plant protection products. These are just two examples illustrating that the present Community framework for plant protection products leaves something to be desired.
Given the current state of affairs, we are unfortunately forced to extend the evaluation deadlines for plant protection products. Only in this way can we get the difficult process of the past 10 years back on track. I should like to bring three important points to your attention.
First of all, harmful substances must be phased out as soon as possible, with the time when the new period sets in applying as the latest date. Further delays are, in my view, highly undesirable. Secondly, we must exercise restraint when granting exemptions. Thirdly, we must ensure that the conditions we have prescribed for extending the assessment periods are actually observed. Herein lies an important monitoring role for Parliament. In short, I call for consistent action when it comes to authorising, using and controlling plant protection products within Europe.
I have to get something off my chest with regard to the Dutch translation of the word 'protection'. This is sometimes translated into Dutch as ‘gewasbescherming’ – with good reason, and the interpreters have been using that word repeatedly this evening – but the agenda also mentions ‘gewasbestrijdingsmiddelen’ on one occasion, which is, of course, the exact opposite of ‘gewasbeschermingsmiddelen’. This mistake often occurs in the Dutch version of the Commission documents, as well as the document by Mr Lannoye, through no fault of his own, of course. I propose that something be done about this, and that we stop mixing up the terms 'onkruidbestrijding' and 'gewasbescherming'."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples