Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-04-04-Speech-2-371"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20060404.26.2-371"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, first of all, I should like to express warm thanks to the rapporteur, Mrs Doyle, who has given the initial impetus in several important areas in order to keep the environmental quality of these proposals intact. I look back with pleasure on her tenacity during the trialogues.
We have a result we can be proud of. Tomorrow, we will have achieved two milestones permanently, or at least, that is what I thought before we heard the statement.
A first milestone has been achieved in the area of climate policy. There is broad consensus here in this House that we must take climate change seriously. Measures are needed urgently in order to reduce the level of greenhouse gases. The curtailment of f-gases constitutes a major step. F-gases are potent greenhouse gases that are used in all kinds of products, including air-conditioning and cooling systems, fire extinguishers, foam used in the construction industry and even in the soles of shoes. It is good that Parliament and the Council have drawn a clear line. Greenhouse gases must be reduced as much as possible. Innovation is important, and that is how global warming is decelerated.
The second milestone is of major importance politically, namely the internal market. We made our views clear at first reading. Instead of the internal market legal base, we opted for the environment-linked legal base. This was warmly supported by a majority in the Socialist Group in the European Parliament. The reason is that a number of countries had taken further measures off their own bats. With regard to the internal market legal base, Austria and Denmark were at risk of having to withdraw their more extensive measures, which is really unacceptable. The internal market should maintain a high level of environmental protection. If that is not the case, it should be possible for the Member States to take more extensive measures.
Europe is not there to impose changes for the worse on the Member States, or to deny the Member States the scope to adopt decent environmental policy. We have managed to drive this message home at least. It is Parliament’s and the Council’s wish for Member States to be able to take more extensive measures. The Commission must, of course, closely monitor the situation and ensure that the restrictions of market access are proportionate.
Commissioner, in all honesty, I find your statement lamentably insubstantial. I had at least expected you to have shown the political will to give Member States wishing to take those more extensive measures all the leg-room they need. It was really unnecessary to read out Article 95, with which we are all familiar, and we actually expect the political will from you to grant Member States this leg-room. This is what is desperately needed, because innovation is important for climate policy, but ultimately also for our economy and for the Lisbon agenda. So in that respect, I would like to see you withdraw the statement you made a moment ago. I think that we have not heard the last of this."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples