Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-11-16-Speech-3-283"
Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
---|---|
rdf:type | |
dcterms:Date | |
dcterms:Is Part Of | |
dcterms:Language | |
lpv:document identification number |
"en.20051116.20.3-283"2
|
lpv:hasSubsequent | |
lpv:speaker | |
lpv:spokenAs | |
lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, my group supports the proposal to reject this directive, albeit on the basis of arguments that are different from the rapporteur’s.
Firstly, I take the view that this directive would render the effective control of pests impossible in certain Member States – I am thinking especially of the muskrat in the Netherlands. This can have major consequences for public safety. As long as the proposal contains no exemption in this respect, I cannot lend it my support. Commissioner Dimas said that he could understand the concerns of many organisations. I would like to know if he could also understand the concern we in the Netherlands have for the safety of our citizens, if dikes are undermined by muskrats digging burrows.
My second argument for rejection concerns the legal foundation. Protocol 33 to the EC Treaty grants the EU competence in the area of animal welfare only in the framework of agricultural, transport, internal market or research policy. The draft directive implements the international agreement on humane trapping methods, which was concluded in the context of the common trade policy. Since the proposal harmonises the Member States’ standards for animal traps within the internal market and does not serve a direct environmental goal, Article 95 alone can be seen as the correct legal foundation for this proposal. I would like to have Commissioner Dimas’ reaction to this."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples