Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-12-15-Speech-1-123"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2003-12-15"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Environmental liability2
dcterms:Language	"nl"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20031215.9.1-123"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2003-12-15-Speech-1-1242
lpv:speaker	lp:Marianne Thyssen2
lpv:spokenAs	member_of_the_bureau; EPP-ED (1999-10-12--2004-07-19)3 member; Delegation for relations with Canada (2002-02-07--2004-07-19)3 unknown; Christen-Democratisch & Vlaams (2001-10-01--2004-07-19)3 substitute; Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3 member; Committee on Legal Affairs and the Internal Market (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3 substitute; Delegation to the EU-Poland Joint Parliamentary Committee (2002-03-07--2004-04-30)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, like Mr Karas, I am an adherent of an ecologically-adjusted market economy, and consequently, a strict liability regulation does not worry me. After all, that can have a significant preventive effect and can, as such, be justified. However, we should not, in my view, forget that in the proposal we are discussing this evening, we are introducing ‘liability without fault’. Some see it as self-evident that there can be liability without fault; personally, I think it is, compared to the traditional liability theory of the continental legal tradition, a very radical instrument, and it is precisely because it is so radical that we have to treat it with caution. It is precisely because this instrument is so radical that we have to ensure that a number of pre-conditions are in place. Those pre-conditions have to ensure that the regulation is legally certain, that it is practically workable, that it is fair and that it does not interfere too much with innovation and development. I will not list the amendments that are useful in this respect. Everyone who has followed the debate will know that I am talking about the exclusion grounds for licence holders, about the regulation in relation to the state of scientific knowledge, about the exclusion grounds for people who adhere to good agricultural practice and about the replacement of joint liability by proportionate liability. The Manders report, as we have voted on it in the Committee on Legal Affairs and the Internal Market, provides for those pre-conditions, so I must congratulate the rapporteur and our group’s shadow rapporteur on the work and on the team effort. I should like to ask those of my fellow MEPs who have difficulty with the restrictions introduced in the report, and also the Commission in a way – for it, as I understand it, also has difficulty with a number of our amendments – to revisit the concept of liability without fault very carefully, to bear in mind the difficult, serious impact this can have, and to ensure that we will eventually end up with a better regulation which, for economic reasons and reasons of fairness, is showing some clemency. We must naturally ensure that the earth remains viable, but I think that we must also ensure that we have a viable economy, and that we find people who are willing to go into business here."@en1
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata	"inter alia"1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph