Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-05-09-Speech-1-095"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20050509.15.1-095"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, I actually know few rapporteurs who are as amenable to this Parliament’s shadow rapporteurs as Mr Maaten, but still, as a Dutch person, I would say to him that our working relationship was once again excellent, for our concerns are those of the Netherlands, a country which has earmarked some 600 bathing waters and required them to be of good quality and beneficial to the environment and health. They must also allow the public to practise recreational activities. Although this is all very important to us, we would, at the same time, say that a number of requirements covered by the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety actually went way too far and did not really add anything, or would not have added anything, by way of extra public health protection. We therefore shared the rapporteur’s concerns but at the moment, I am very confident – well, slightly worried, but mainly confident – that things will work out tomorrow.
We, along with the majority, are glad that the initially planned extension of bathing water to include recreational water has been abandoned.
Secondly, there is the issue of bathing water being of ‘sufficient’ quality. There are people in this House who want bathing water to be of excellent quality straight away, but what about national parks or areas of outstanding natural beauty? I happen to know that in nature reserves, only on account of the faeces of birds, for example, the source of pollution is so diffuse that bathing water will never be of a good quality, that it can never remain ‘sufficient’. I therefore take the view that we must reject a second batch of amendments on which we will be voting tomorrow, in which the category of ‘sufficient’ has been deleted.
Finally, I am also concerned about Amendment 42 from the Group of the Greens/European Free Alliance, who claim that once bathing water has been selected, it should not be struck off the list, even if you know that it will never meet the quality requirements again. That is too crazy for words and I hope that no one in this House will back this notion."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples