Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-06-12-Speech-1-122"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2006-06-12"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Protection of groundwater against pollution (debate)2
dcterms:Language	"sv"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20060612.18.1-122"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2006-06-12-Speech-1-1232
lpv:speaker	lp:Jonas Sjöstedt2
lpv:spokenAs	substitute; Delegation for relations with Switzerland, Iceland and Norway and to the European Economic Area (EEA) Joint Parliamentary Committee (2004-09-15--2006-09-26)3 unknown; Vänsterpartiet (2004-07-20--2006-09-26)3 substitute; CONT (2004-07-21--2006-09-26)3 substitute; Temporary Committee on the alleged use of European countries by the CIA for the transport and illegal detention of prisoners (2006-01-19--2006-09-26)3 member; ENVI (2004-07-21--2006-09-26)3 substitute; INTA (2004-07-21--2006-09-26)3 member; EUL/NGL (2004-07-20--2006-09-26)3 member; Delegation to the ACP-EU Joint Parliamentary Assembly (2004-09-15--2006-09-26)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, I too would like to begin by adding my voice to the chorus of voices thanking the rapporteur for an excellent piece of work. If one compares the position of the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety with the common position of the Council, there is an enormous difference in quality in respect of environmental content. The common position of the Council reminds me a little of a Swiss cheese that is full of holes. The Member States will be able, to some extent, to do whatever they want with these holes – or chose to do nothing at all in certain areas. This is, in my view, entirely unacceptable. In the committee, there was a grand unanimity – 50 members voted in favour of the proposals and none voted against. This ought to give Mrs Klaß a very strong position, which I am certain she will make the best possible use of during the negotiations with the Council of Ministers. What is most important is the position of agriculture and that it should not be given a special status whereby it is exempted from the obligations otherwise applying. Most important of all is the issue of discharges of nitrates. Discharges of nitrates from agriculture are today perhaps the most serious source of groundwater pollution. In large parts of the EU, we have problems with levels of nitrates in the groundwater that are directly hazardous to health. Clearly, this means that we must act on what is the main problem, in this case the discharges from agriculture. As far as we are concerned, this is the absolutely critical issue. A reduction in the discharges of nitrates from agriculture would be excellent for the groundwater, but it would also have other positive effects. At present, nitrate discharges are also an important cause of the eutrophication of lakes, seas and other bodies of water. As we improve the situation for the groundwater we can also, at the same time, do something for other large-scale environmental problems. This will become clear, for example, in the case of the Baltic Sea, where we have great problems with eutrophication as a result of emissions from agriculture. In the light of all this, I should like to recommend that we vote in favour of the amendments proposed by the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety and that we play tough in the conciliation with the Council of Ministers."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph