Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-05-29-Speech-3-173"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20020529.12.3-173"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
". – Mr President, I am grateful for the opportunity to discuss this issue here today. First, I wish to thank both Mr Lannoye and Mr Parish for their efforts in preparing the texts we have in front of us. I await with considerable interest the final text of the resolution.
Mr President, I recognise that there are many issues we could discuss and there are many points in the texts in front of us with which I could take issue, but I do not want to take up too much time, and I think that these issues would be better discussed when we propose amending the directive. It would be remiss of me not to acknowledge the impact of July 2003 when several hundred substances will be withdrawn from the market. This will include substances where there are few or even no recognised alternatives. Member States and farmers insist that this could create serious problems.
The Commission is sensitive to this issue and is working with the Member States to see how such problems could be resolved and minimised without compromising safety. However, I note that the present text suggests that any authorisations granted for essential uses should have strict conditions attached. I will be careful to report this view of Parliament to the Member States.
Finally, I recognise that there is some impatience regarding the adoption by the Commission of a communication on sustainable use of pesticides. This is in the final stages of our internal consultation procedure and will be available in time, I hope, to form part of your summer reading.
To conclude, I appreciate receiving the conclusions of Parliament and look forward to coming to you with proposals for change later in the year.
My intention in publishing the Commission's report in August last year was twofold. First, to ensure greater transparency. Second, to improve understanding of the evaluation process for plant protection products and the problems confronting the Commission in meeting the impossible deadlines under the present directive.
In the present text of the resolution, there are a number of statements and assertions with which the Commission would strongly disagree. I could provide in due course a comprehensive reply to the resolution after its formal adoption. As you will all know, although the Commission report focused on our progress to date in the evaluation of active substances, it also has one eye firmly on the future. We all recognise that all evaluations will not be complete by 2003. There are many reasons for this, these are dealt with in the report and many of you will be familiar with them.
I would mention in particular, the mismatch between the ambitious targets set in the directive and the resources available to the Commission to deliver on these targets. This situation requires us to seek agreement on an approach to be taken in July 2003 as regards those substances and there will be several hundred of them where evaluations have yet to be completed.
Although the directive delegated this decision to the Commission through the comitology procedure, we considered that the issue was of sufficient importance to request your agreement on the approach to be taken in relation to these defended substances in 2003.
I share the view that this work should be completed in 2008. However, I can commit to it only with the provisos that deadlines are respected and sufficient resources are made available by all partners in the process. We should also be aware that major new scientific issues might arise that would necessitate requests for additional data, thus delaying the decision-making process.
The second point that needs to be highlighted is that the directive is now ten years old. It clearly needs to be improved. The preparation of the report has enabled us to reflect on how to effect these improvements without compromising the directive's principles. There are a number of areas where effectiveness could be improved and where problems that have arisen over the years could be resolved. Again, I appreciate your feedback in this regard and I envisage coming back with proposals to amend the directive later this year.
To this end, we are organising a stakeholder meeting in Greece in July in preparation for the Greek Presidency and we would welcome both the presence of Mr Lannoye and Mr Parish at those discussions to make sure that Parliament has a voice even in our preparatory work. Similarly, pesticide residues are an important aspect of this area of work and we intend to bring forward proposals in the coming months to consolidate and amend the basic legislation.
An important point is that the forthcoming proposals will be under the co-decision procedure. This will allow Parliament a full say in the final content of the legislation which of course I greatly welcome."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples