Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2004-03-30-Speech-2-314"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20040330.13.2-314"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, I should first like to mention the definition of waste. This proposal does not contain a specific definition of waste from the extractive industries, but instead reproduces the general definition of waste from the Waste Framework Directive, 75/442/EEC. This does not prevent such waste being reused for a beneficial purpose, for instance in construction materials. It is important to make this clear.
I should like to give the Commission’s reaction to important amendments. The Commission can accept Amendment No 32 fully, and Amendment No 26 in part or in principle. The amendments concerning the scope of the proposal are of course of particular importance. Amendment No 15 concerning Article 2.3 proposes that material such as unpolluted topsoil and waste from prospecting be covered by the limited requirements pursuant to this Article. The Commission can support this course of action, as it increases legal certainty and also improves environmental safeguards. We also support the amendment to the effect that disposal facilities for inert waste should also be covered by the provisions on serious accidents.
Amendment No 15 proposes that the limited requirements of Article 2.3 should include non-hazardous waste. That part of Amendment No 15 would have a significant impact on the overall effectiveness of the proposal, and the Commission cannot accept that. For different reasons, the Commission cannot support the amendments that introduce certain measures for exhausted mine voids that have been allowed to fill up with water. We think that this issue should be resolved under the Water Framework Directive.
It is necessary to manage the great burden from the past presented by closed and abandoned disposal facilities. The Commission has proposed an exchange of information on methods for charting and rehabilitating these facilities. Amendment No 71 would make this information obligatory at EU level. Drawing up inventories to identify the worst sources of pollution is a major step on the way to solving this problem. The Commission can support this strategy. Decisions on the rehabilitation itself should, however, rest with the Member States.
Another issue is the requirement for financial guarantees to cover the costs if operators can no longer be held responsible. The Commission can support the clarifications in Amendments Nos 66 and 67, but cannot accept the part of Amendment No 66 that stipulates that these procedures be approved by the Commission, as this falls within the Member States’ competence. Nor can we accept amendments concerning the form of these guarantees, as the text should retain its present flexibility.
A transitional period has been granted for disposal facilities granted a permit before the entry into force of this Directive. Amendment No 74 contains an attempt to introduce certain requirements during that period, including by referring to the Water Framework Directive. The Commission thinks this unnecessary, as the provisions of EU water legislation and also the general requirements of the Waste Framework Directive apply. In addition, the rationale behind the transitional period should not be undermined.
Amendments Nos 29 and 35 underline the need for appropriate management of the closure and after-closure of disposal facilities. A number of amendments also propose making reference to EU standards for evaluating environmentally friendly management. Amendments Nos 32 and 57 establish a direct link to the objectives of the Water Framework Directive, and Amendment No 46 establishes a direct link to
protected areas. Finally, Amendment No 7 also explains the role of this Directive in EU
development aid. The Commission supports these amendments, which have the same objectives as the Commission proposal and which increase consistency with other important EU legislation.
I am going to leave a complete list, giving the Commission’s opinions on the amendments, with the Secretariat, and I should like to express my thanks for this initial debate on this important proposal, which will raise the profile of both these problems and our proposed solutions. As many Members have said, action is needed, as these problems are much more common than we think, as are the recurrent accidents in Europe and around the world. The problem must be tackled."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples