Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-12-15-Speech-1-115"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20031215.9.1-115"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Mr President, I should first of all like to thank the rapporteur. I should also like to thank the shadow rapporteurs because they have worked very hard and closely with the rapporteur in trying to come to a compromise on this directive.
I should like to pick up on a couple of points. First of all, the 'polluter pays' principle has been mentioned a few times tonight. We already have 'polluter-pays' legislation. In the past the polluter has only paid a fine, but we have had a fundamental shift and now the polluter pays to clear up the damage that he or she has created. That is a fundamental shift in legislation. If we are to enact that then we have to look at the financial security systems behind it. That is why I believe mandatory financial security is important. It is a key point here. I accept the point that Mrs Niebler and the Commissioner made that the market is not yet developed. That is why, in a number of amendments, we ask the Commission to study the whole market and ensure that when we finally bring in a mandatory system at a later date, the whole area is covered.
I should like to add that we have also gauged the points of view of the Member States and given them responsibility for defining low-risk activities, i.e. taking them out. That is a major step forwards for businesses of all shapes and sizes.
With regard to the Commissioner's point on Member State responsibility, I realise that he had difficulties over the last few months negotiating with the Council on this point and that it has not been easy. However, we have to come to a situation where if somebody defaults, or an operator goes into insolvency and does not have this insurance, somebody has to clean up. Who is it going to be? It cannot fall on the local authorities; it has to fall on a Member State and we cannot allow Member States to just walk away from it and allow pollution to continue to grow. Therefore the Member States have a responsibility.
Briefly, on the mitigating circumstances, I am glad to see that the Commissioner is accepting Amendments Nos 40 and 61. I hope they go through. And I am glad to see the mitigating circumstances taken into account, along with permit defences."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples