Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-09-23-Speech-2-301"

PredicateValue (sorted: default)
rdf:type
dcterms:Date
dcterms:Is Part Of
dcterms:Language
lpv:document identification number
"en.20030923.9.2-301"2
lpv:hasSubsequent
lpv:speaker
lpv:spokenAs
lpv:translated text
"Mr President, I would like to thank Mr Jonckheer for his excellent work and I think the directive, as it was approved in the committee, is very good. In my opinion, it is a good and positive sign that an attempt is being made to harmonise the environmental point of view with healthy competition in the energy markets. Common minimal levels of energy taxation are needed and the polluter pays principle is important, as long as we remember to give attention to the effects on competition and employment. Furthermore, emissions trading, which is beginning to be implemented, is an important means of regulation, and we can therefore also avoid regulation overlapping with it, as would be the case with taxation of energy products and the various exemptions proposed thereto. In the matter of energy taxation, in general renewable natural resources should be treated favourably, and in the same way there should be tax relief on new fuels that are particularly environmentally friendly. In this way we can use financial incentives to steer both consumers and industry in the direction of environmentally friendly energy use. The Commission proposal on tax incentives with regard to certain biofuels is worthy of our firm support. Although this directive does not directly deal with hydrogen, for example, it is a good, and will in the future be, an important energy source that in time could clearly replace oil for transport in particular. It is obviously worth supporting hydrogen in matters of taxation. We have to remember, however, that any form of taxation that deviates from neutral taxation has an impact on market activity and for that reason any such support measures as these should be temporary and exceptional in nature, in order to promote new fuels and production methods. The troubled aviation industry has enjoyed tax exemptions on air fuel for a long time. Taxation in this area is a problematic issue because aircraft can choose fairly freely where to refuel. If a tax were imposed on air fuel within the EU but not outside it, this would lead to refuelling outside the Union. That is why the international agreement on the tax-exempt status of air fuels should be respected. The Member States have a right they must not lose to decide themselves on taxes on fuels for local use. These fuels, such as peat, for example, which is important in my country, are of no importance to a viable internal market, but at local level they may well be very important and necessary sources of energy and employment. In Finland and the other Nordic countries taxes on energy are already widely applied, so these countries would have no problem with even shorter periods of transition. I, however, have yielded to the will of the majority in my group. My group is not in favour of a shorter timescale, as Mr Jonckheer has proposed. In other words, I personally would have been prepared to go further in this."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

1http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/English.ttl.gz
2http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/Events_and_structure.ttl.gz
3http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/spokenAs.ttl.gz

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph