Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-09-25-Speech-3-197"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20020925.9.3-197"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, this morning we had a three-hour debate on sustainable development. At the World Summit in Johannesburg, the European Union advocated a global water initiative. This should make it possible to realise the aims of the World Summit on Sustainable Development – access to clean drinking water and basic sanitation. So what are we doing, we who want to achieve such ambitious targets at international level, here in our own countries in Europe?
We are making a law on abating water pollution that will reinforce the use of yesterday's technology for tomorrow's developments. That, at any rate, will be the result if the opponents of the amendments tabled by the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy succeed in defeating them in plenary. Regrettably they include our rapporteur, who actually ought to represent the opinion of the majority of the committee. Unfortunately, amongst these opponents of advanced technology are also colleagues from groups and countries which are usually in the vanguard of any initiatives to protect water and the environment and cannot go far enough.
Go and stand sometime at a filling station in a large harbour for recreational craft; you will see the quantities of fuel, diesel, petrol and oil that are pumped into the tanks of these boats. A considerable proportion of this fuel, although it depends on the design, is discharged directly into the water – without undergoing combustion – along with the exhaust emissions, because the exhaust pipe is under the surface of the water. The pollutants accumulate in inland waters and lakes, which are frequently used for the abstraction of drinking water. Nowhere else is the exchange of pollutants so great. It is precisely on lakes that the density of boats is often particularly high.
That is why we want more stringent requirements for these waters, that is, stricter limit values for recreational craft. The technology, Mr Callanan, is available. As an engineer you ought actually to be aware of this. Since existing craft will enjoy absolute protection and be able to be used until the end of their life, the argument of our Nordic colleagues does not hold water either.
The limit values laid down now will only have to be complied with by boats newly brought onto the market from 2005. An individual who buys a new recreational craft after 2005 will be able to use it on all waters. That is why I would urgently request your support for Amendments Nos 1, 11 and 13. By adopting these amendments we Europeans would be putting our words in Johannesburg into action.
Mr Callanan, I have already heard your arguments almost word for word here in plenary; it was nearly 20 years ago in the mid-eighties, in the last century, when we were debating limit values for cars and the introduction of new technology. Then, as now, your country was the first to slam on the brakes. It is quite astonishing that in two decades you have not learnt any better. I believe that water is also the life of the future. We must do all we can to prevent our waters from becoming even more polluted."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples