Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-09-05-Speech-1-098"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20050905.19.1-098"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, the Group of the Greens/European Free Alliance also fully supports the report by Mr Sjöstedt and congratulates him on his work.
It is true that at a time when political Europe is searching for its identity, Europeans are, for their part, demanding that health protection and the preservation of the environment remain a priority for the European Union. This draft directive is directed to this end and it will also provide legal clarification.
This directive is justified by the amount of waste created by mineral extractions, which we know produce each year nearly a third of the waste generated in the Union, some of which is toxic, indeed very toxic. As it is inadequately treated and stored, it can seriously threaten the environment and people’s safety. We all recall the consequences of the Baia Mare and Baia Borsa disasters.
This directive must also ensure that the new accession countries have the means to eradicate pollution from waste produced by extractions in the past. Furthermore, the industrialists concerned own operations throughout the world, and in order to prevent further disasters, the European Union must set an example by implementing operating rules guaranteeing the safety of workers and better protection of the environment.
If you will allow me, I would like to offer three examples: the first concerns the operation of the uranium mines in Niger by European businesses. I have some knowledge of this – they are French businesses. The issue of contaminated waste has been raised time and again, during the Irish Presidency, for example, but even now questions remain unanswered. The second example concerns the very controversial project of the opening of a gold mine at Rosia Montana, in Romania, a project that provides for the construction of a tailings pond for waste of highly toxic extraction, with a dam – brace yourselves – measuring 30 metres high. Finally, the last example calls to mind the destruction of the coral reef in New Caledonia, for which we were responsible, by extractive waste from the nickel mines. This last example, Commissioner, illustrates the need to prohibit direct discharges into continental, coastal or marine waters, unless, of course, they are compatible with the Water and Waste directives.
For all of these reasons, we support the work carried out by our rapporteur and we hope that you will support these amendments."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples