Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2004-01-12-Speech-1-122"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2004-01-12"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Nuclear energy2
dcterms:Language	"de"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20040112.8.1-122"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2004-01-12-Speech-1-1232
lpv:speaker	lp:Hiltrud Breyer2
lpv:spokenAs	member; Delegation for relations with the Member States of ASEAN, south-east Asia and the Republic of Korea (2002-02-07--2004-07-19)3 substitute; Committee on Industry, External Trade, Research and Energy (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3 substitute; Committee on Women's Rights and Equal Opportunities (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3 member; Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3 unknown; Bündnis 90/die Grünen (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 member; G/EFA (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, Commissioner, even though the trend right across Europe is to leave nuclear power behind, the Commission is doing the donkey work for the ailing nuclear industry. Rather than opting for the energies of the future – by which I mean renewable energies – you are trying to revive the nuclear energy industry, using artificial means to breathe new life into an industrial sector that is already dead. This shows what close links you have with the nuclear lobby. What you, Commissioner, have put forward under the pretext of standardising safety norms in the enlarged EU is actually a massive programme of support for the European nuclear industry, which cannot pay its own way. Instead of imposing real standards of safety, what you are basically doing with these soft and undefined basic standards is, I believe, trying to give the public a tranquillising pill. What your nuclear package actually lacks is any hint of any drastic tightening-up of the safety provisions; on top of that, you are trying to impose the burden of monitoring the nuclear installations on the Member States. We know that you have no solution to the problem of disposal, so it does not help when you try to set really unrealistic deadlines for individual sites, and I find it even more scandalous that you are, indirectly, inviting the Member States to shuffle off onto Eastern Europe the problems with disposal that they have not been able to resolve. Especially in terms of the illegal dispersal and discharge of radioactivity into the environment, I regard that as enormously risky."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph