Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2004-03-09-Speech-2-366"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20040309.13.2-366"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, Mr Kronberger's report receives unqualified support from the Group of the Greens/European Free Alliance. Limit values are needed, for example for arsenic. This is a real problem in my country. The town of Coevorden near the German border has made the decision to incinerate virtually all the old railway sleepers in Europe, thus releasing the arsenic from them into the ambient air. That is completely wrong and that is why we need strict limit values. If these cannot be put in place straight away because the political majority is not in favour, that is extremely regrettable, but these heavy metals are carcinogenic and their use has to be curbed. If that is to be done via target values as a short-term measure, then that receives my reluctant agreement. However, in the longer term, limit values definitely have to be introduced on the basis of one extra cancer case in one million cases. We adopted exactly the same guiding principle for the drinking water directive, which was accepted by the Commission, the body that had proposed the principle, the Council and Parliament. Why do we not do the same in the case of arsenic, cadmium, mercury and nickel? That would be the way forward towards a possible compromise."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples