Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-09-07-Speech-3-109"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20050907.15.3-109"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
I have recently received a large number of letters from professionals in the hotel, catering and construction industries who have informed us of their legitimate concerns regarding a common position of the Council on the exposure of workers to optical radiation.
When examined more closely, this recommendation is, in fact, mind-boggling, leading one to wonder just how seriously the wording can be taken. The need to improve and better manage the safety of workers exposed - in industry, for instance - to artificial optical radiation is understandable, but why was it necessary also to take an interest in so-called ‘natural’ optical radiation? Why is there this desire excessively to regulate the working conditions of people exposed to the …sun to varying degrees? Besides attracting ridicule, these proposals which, if implemented, would produce inconclusive results, clearly look set to increase restrictions, particularly for small- and medium-sized enterprises.
Against the backdrop of international insecurity that is turning our countries upside down and of an economic and social crisis and crisis of identity, this kind of unbelievable proposal demonstrates once again the degree to which these pro-Europeans who want to control everything are out of touch with reality. That is why I opposed this new gimmick which, with its administrative overkill and the financial stranglehold it exerts, is in danger of placing a dark cloud over many of our businesses."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples