Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-02-11-Speech-2-263"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20030211.11.2-263"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Everyone knows we are facing an enormous growth in traffic and Mr Piecyk has today set out all the awful effects this will have. To summarise briefly they are the social effects, environmental and health effects and safety effects and globalisation has a part to play in this. In short, I think that the problem is accurately described in the White Paper. What we are in principle seeking of course, for environmental reasons, for example, but also for a number of other reasons, is the separation of economic growth and transport and related problems.
What is missing for me, and here I concur with Mr Piecyk, who was talking about avoiding traffic, is what we in the Netherlands call transport prevention or transport limitation. In the Netherlands this is absolutely an existing line of policy and I should like it to be taken seriously at European level. It is a sectoral approach. Everyone can imagine what happens if you decide to produce more regionally, for example in the agriculture sector. Then you have no need to transport any meat or transport any animals.
A second option of course is to tackle it with new technology. All kinds of things are possible in this regard: low emission and low energy cars, etc. Where the modal shift is concerned, I heard Mrs Peijs arguing just now that rail must not receive this stimulus from the European Union. I cannot agree with that at all. I think that it is indeed necessary, but I also think that there is an absolute need for the emission problems of rail compared with the other modes to be tackled seriously.
Final point: pricing. If we look at the pricing discussions to date, then I find it disappointing that, after the four years that I have been in this Parliament, after a group has worked on this subject at high level, after we have drafted the Costa report, we have still not made any advances at that level. I must say that I see more in the practical approaches, in Switzerland for example, than in the theoretical considerations. Finally, moreover, I support the standpoint concerning the expansion issues and the exhortation not to slip back into the same mistakes, as previously indicated."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples