Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-03-27-Speech-4-087"
Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
---|---|
rdf:type | |
dcterms:Date | |
dcterms:Is Part Of | |
dcterms:Language | |
lpv:document identification number |
"en.20030327.3.4-087"2
|
lpv:hasSubsequent | |
lpv:speaker | |
lpv:spokenAs | |
lpv:translated text |
".
As I stated in the debate yesterday, I consider one of the parts in question to be acceptable. This first amendment to the Directive concerns nonylphenol (NP) and nonylphenol ethoxylate (NPE), used in the production of some materials. This leaves no room for doubt that, since NP and NPE tend to accumulate dangerously in living organisms, framework directive 2000/60/EC, on water, classifies NPs as ‘priority hazardous substances’ and since enormous quantities of NP and NPE are marketed and used, their release into the environment must be strictly limited.
My reservations centred on the second amendment to the Directive, on the use of hexavalent chromium (or chromium VI) in cement and in cement preparations.
Today, with the first block of amendments having been adopted, thereby eliminating the second block that originated in the specialist parliamentary committee, I welcome various Members’ efforts to reach agreement, which explains this major change in commitment. This is greatly to be welcomed and could attenuate or eliminate any remaining resistance that might be felt. Nevertheless, now that some partial votes have been taken and the pace of voting in plenary does not allow us immediately to find out the overall balance of Parliament’s final text, I have chosen to abstain …
(
)"@en1
|
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples