Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2004-04-19-Speech-1-174"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20040419.14.1-174"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, Parliament’s draft report supports life-cycle thinking and provides sound guidance on how the Commission should further develop the Integrated Product Policy over the next few years. We have put a lot of effort into finding a better name that will tell the uninitiated something of what this is about, if only that it is an important task. I really do appreciate the efforts that have gone into this report, particularly the work done by the rapporteur, Mr Wijkman.
In the Commission communication, we emphasise that it was necessary to show how the Integrated Product Policy can operate in practice, and we have also said that we wish to use two methods to do this. Firstly, we wish to carry out a couple of pilot projects that bring together different actors to discuss, and preferably also to implement, measures that reduce these special products’ environmental effects. Secondly, we are in the process of drawing up a European inventory of those products that have the greatest potential for improving the environment. Such an inventory can help us direct our efforts at the most important products.
The report contains many interesting insights. Allow me to comment on a couple of important ones that show the link between the thematic strategies and this proposal, also mentioned by the rapporteur. I should also like to describe how I see the link between the Integrated Product Policy and other initiatives mentioned in the report, particularly the two thematic strategies: the strategy on the sustainable use of natural resources and the strategy for waste prevention and recycling.
My long-term vision for these three areas is really quite uncomplicated. I believe that the strategy on natural resources should include the general problems linked to the issue of how we are to break the link between economic growth and environmental damage. The strategy must state what is to be done to break this link and establish general objectives concerning the way in which natural resources are to be protected against over-exploitation and pollution. The Integrated Product Policy must then transform these resource-focused objectives – do not forget that natural resources provide us with minerals, food, water and clean air – into practical measures for reducing products’ and services’ effects upon the environment, at the same time as creating business opportunities.
It is of no consequence that we are beginning to prepare an Integrated Product Policy even before the resource strategy is ready. As we said in our proposal, we can do a lot right now. I also believe that the strategy on waste and recycling should be more clearly focused upon the environmental and market problems that arise in that part of the life-cycle. This does not mean ignoring the products’ whole life-cycles. On the contrary, the measures taken here must take account of environmental effects throughout the life-cycle, with the Integrated Product Policy being applied.
Nor, therefore, do I think that the Integrated Product Policy should embrace resource-based objectives. I think that these are better placed within the resource strategy. Nor do I believe that the Integrated Product Policy should advocate the use of certain materials, irrespective of whether they are bio-based materials, composite materials or other materials, because there is then a danger of ignoring the life-cycle dimension.
Secondly, I wish to emphasise that I do not believe that this is the right moment to prepare a framework directive on the Integrated Product Policy. Alongside the issue of what, realistically, can be part of such a directive – it should cover a very large number of tools and concepts, as well as its being possible to monitor compliance – I believe quite simply that it is too early to decide whether such a framework directive is necessary. However impatient we may be, I believe that we must wait a little and see how different actors apply the Integrated Product Policy in practice. That applies to industry, governments and consumers. If they do not make use of the opportunities it offers, we can consider a strategy with less of a voluntary basis, but I believe it is too early to draw conclusions about this at present.
In 2007, the Commission will review the two points I have mentioned, as well as the whole of the Integrated Product Policy. If it appears necessary, we shall make changes. For example, we might place greater emphasis upon services, recommend a framework directive or change the Integrated Product Policy as a result of the discussions concerning the thematic strategies. Moreover, I believe that the rapporteur’s contribution contains many important points which should definitely do more to direct our overall thinking as we face the future."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples