Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-06-13-Speech-4-020"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2002-06-13"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Pedestrian protection: Commitment by the European automobile industry2
dcterms:Language	"de"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20020613.1.4-020"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2002-06-13-Speech-4-0212
lpv:speaker	lp:Georg Jarzembowski2
lpv:spokenAs	member; EPP-ED (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 vice-chair; Delegation for relations with Japan (2002-02-07--2004-07-19)3 substitute; Committee on Foreign Affairs, Human Rights, Common Security and Defence Policy (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3 member; Committee on Regional Policy, Transport and Tourism (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3 unknown; Christlich Demokratische Union Deutschlands (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, we are trying by means of this instrument – which we must recognise deals with a technical field which we have to acknowledge overstretches our capacities as MEPs – to apply the law to technical matters. Commissioner, this new instrument presumes twofold legitimate expectations. For a start, we are trusting the Commission, as, before the directive reaches us and is adopted by us, we have to expect that you will check to see that the Commission really will fulfil its obligation for the next two or three years from the word go, as it were. It is, secondly, presupposed that you must, in theory at least, join us in trusting the industry to actually do what it has declared itself willing to do. In so far, I call on the industry and the Commission to prove to us and to the citizens whom we represent, that legal undertakings are a good way of achieving rapid improvements, particularly in technical fields. As has been said, though, we Members of this House are, as I see it, obliged to check up on the Commission and on the industry to see whether they actually merit our trust and whether they really are promptly and effectively putting their promises into practice. I would like, Commissioner, to make another point. I take the view that, should this directive and this system come to pass, we in this House must also be free not to insist on all the old technical standards. That, Mr Bouwman, is why I cannot vote for your Amendment No 9, as item 14 of our motion for a resolution states that we expect the directive to take as standards either the four EEVC tests or other methods offering at least equal or possibly better safeguards. This Parliament should not behave in 2002 as if it already knew what testing methods will be right in 2005 and 2010. So, Mr President, as regards the question of which are the right tests for the framework directive, I ask the Commissioner to submit proposals founded on objective criteria and modern knowledge."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph