Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-01-16-Speech-4-097"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2003-01-16"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Effect of low-frequency active sonar on marine life2
dcterms:Language	"en"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20030116.5.4-097"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2003-01-16-Speech-4-0982
lpv:speaker	lp:Caroline Lucas2
lpv:spoken text	"This issue is of growing concern both to the public and to this Parliament, and I think the fact that we were able to attract 60 signatures to our oral question on the subject is a clear testimony to that. As my colleague Mrs Korhola has said, there is more and more evidence that suggests that these highly intensive active sonars pose a very major threat to marine mammals and to fish. The frightening fact is that this technology exposes them to noise pollution at levels 200 billion times greater than that which we know already disturbs them, and so it is not really surprising that we are already seeing deaths from lung haemorrhages, from hearing loss and disruption of feeding, breeding and communication. But this technology also constitutes a breach of the United Nations Law of the Sea Convention which requires states to take all measures that are necessary to prevent, reduce and control pollution in the marine environment from any source. The time has come, accordingly, for NATO and its members to act, and since European Union Member States make up over half of the 19 members of NATO, the EU has a special responsibility to promote action. For the Commission to respond to a written question of mine on 29 November 2002 simply by saying this type of technology needs to be used with caution is not good enough. The fact is that this type of technology cannot be used with caution when you consider that, at a hundred miles from the ship which is the source of the noise, this noise can still cause a tearing of the tissues in the air sac, for example, behind whales' and dolphins' brains. That is why we want to see an immediate moratorium on any deployment of LFAS by navies of any NATO country and we want a comprehensive and independent impact assessment to take place. We also want the US and NATO countries to prepare and make public the studies on the potentially adverse effects of LFAS which are required by law under Article 206 of the Law of the Sea. We had hoped too that the Council might have been prepared to make a statement on LFAS here this afternoon as well and I am disappointed that it is not here, but there is a clear role for the Commission as well and I have two specific questions for it: will it agree to conduct a study on the impact of LFAS on the marine environment, and will it ensure that the subject is raised in the transatlantic dialogue? I look forward very much to your response."@en1
lpv:spokenAs	unknown; Green Party (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 substitute; Committee on Regional Policy, Transport and Tourism (2002-01-17--2003-04-02)3 member; G/EFA (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 member; Committee on Industry, External Trade, Research and Energy (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3 vice-president; Members from the European Parliament to the Joint Parliamentary Assembly of the Agreement between the African, Caribbean and Pacific States and the European Union (ACP-EU) (2002-02-06--2003-02-17)3
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata	"Lucas (Verts/ALE )."1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph