Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-09-03-Speech-2-147"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20020903.6.2-147"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs |
vice-chair; Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy (2002-01-22--2004-07-19)3
|
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, the motion for a resolution tabled by the UEN Group and the motions tabled by the other political groups seek essentially to create a credit line in the Union’s budget to help to deal with the damage caused by the natural disasters which have occurred recently in a number of Member States and in the candidate countries. Moreover, the need for emergency Community action was blatantly obvious if we consider the exceptionally widespread effects of the atmospheric phenomena which have affected the whole of Europe. When he visited the disaster areas, President Prodi himself could only, in expressing the Union’s condolences, declare its ready availability to intervene with both exemptions and financial aid.
In our opinion, there are other considerations which point to the need for the creation of a stable credit line. Although many would not admit it, I am afraid it is becoming obvious that our world’s climate is changing, and it is not necessary to subscribe to the theory of alarmism to see this. Of course, meteorological statistics through the years have consistently done their best to show us encouraging comparisons, making the scale of disasters seem less large, but it is not their – still large – scale which is disturbing now so much as the increasing frequency with which they occur, on the one hand, and the fact that they repeatedly occur out of season in Europe, on the other.
The creation of a stable credit line in the Union’s budget would, therefore, help the States to take the necessary action to address the damage caused by these events. There is no doubt, however, that the other, more important part of the Community’s action must relate to prevention. It is certainly useful to reconsider at both national and Community level agricultural production policies, forestation policies and policies for managing hydrological risk areas. In any case, the key issue, the essential consideration, is certainly the greenhouse effect and its harmful consequences
which, I am sad to say, have been scientifically proven beyond all reasonable doubt.
We must reflect on the fact that the issue of the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions – addressed for the first time as early as 10 years ago in New York and for the second time six years later in Kyoto in the famous Protocol – is still far from being resolved in any significant way because of the failure of a sufficient number of States to ratify the Protocol.
The call for Russia to ratify the Protocol is certainly an important step, but it falls within the scope of the political and economic relations which are being established with that country. We still have an unquestionable duty
to insist more firmly that
the candidate countries ratify the Protocol, starting with Poland."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples