Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-09-03-Speech-2-051"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20020903.3.2-051"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, legislation addressing the noise nuisance experienced by many citizens around civil airports is of major importance. At present, we see that there are still major discrepancies. What is not possible in Maastricht is allowed in Bierzet, which is only 10 km down the road. Day and night times vary. Whenever night begins in Düsseldorf, we in the Netherlands only fly at dawn and dusk.
It is therefore high time we brought about harmonisation – albeit cautiously – by introducing a system of noise charges applicable to all European airports to promote the use of quieter aircraft and ban noisy aircraft. I can inform you that most of my group will, in the plenary, be endorsing the amended proposal, as approved by the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy. We welcome the amendments tabled with the aim of making the Commission proposal more binding and, as a result, removing the inappropriate competition element. Mr Blokland's proposal to double the ratio of 20 as an upper limit for the levy to the ratio of 40 is also excellent, for indeed, by expanding the range from 13 to 16 dB, the noisiest aircraft will also be paying more for their nuisance. I therefore support the rapporteur and all the effort he has made in order to reach agreement with everyone.
Since the Commissioner is here, I would like to make a different comment, still in connection with this debate. I therefore venture an observation of a different nature, although it is related to aircraft noise. Commissioner, although I respect the way in which you are trying to tackle aircraft noise, I should also like to hear from you – and if you were unable to respond straight away, you may be able to do so in writing – how we can prevent new sources of noise nuisance from emerging. I would quote the example of Laarbruch at the German-Dutch border, in respect of which many questions have already been asked. In Laarburch, a military airport is being converted into a civil one, and any input from outside is being categorically rejected. In addition, there is no transparency in the conditions under which this airport will be established, the way in which the licences are granted or the question whether the daytime and night-time scheme is being maintained. Commissioner, I would like to find out from you what concrete action you intend to take in order to reduce the incidence of this sort of thing."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples