Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-10-23-Speech-3-328"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20021023.9.3-328"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, Commissioner, we are dealing with two proposals: a proposal for a Council Decision and a proposal for a Council Regulation on the trade, export and import of dangerous chemicals.
The proposal for a Decision requests ratification as soon as possible of the Rotterdam Convention, whose main objective is to regulate the international trade in hazardous chemicals, but also, and this is what we believe in Parliament, to protect human health and the environment, and it is important that this be done now. We have therefore asked that the legal basis be changed from Article 133 of the EC Treaty, which regulates commercial trade, to Article 175, in accordance with codecision.
The proposal for a Regulation, which is exhaustive and very strict, lays down very strict rules for intra-Community trade in pesticides. What we are asking for is a degree of flexibility. As Mr Blokland has already said, we have reached an important agreement after many discussions amongst all the political groups, so that, after the change in the legal basis, this package of amendments can be ratified and accepted both by the Commission and by the Council, and so that Parliament’s position can end at first reading and we can reach a conclusion which we all agree on.
Not all regulations – as Mr Blokland also said – relating to pesticides are equivalent in all countries, and the Commissioner is perfectly aware that they will be unified, but not before the minimum time limit of between 5 and 10 years.
The regulation on pesticides and the analyses for approval are very delayed, since of the over eight hundred active areas to be regulated, not even one hundred have been analysed. We can therefore assume that this issue will be delayed.
The Regulation we are going to approve, on the prior informed consent procedure, is important because it gives the receiver prior information on what the sender is going to send. This is not only valid for the Member States of the European Union but also for non-Member countries, to which we must apply the same requirements.
I would ask the Members of Parliament to support the report as it stands, with the voting list proposed by Mr Blokland, whom I warmly congratulate, since he has done great work on an issue which is very controversial and difficult and highly scientific."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples