Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-09-25-Speech-1-063"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20060925.13.1-063"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, I should like to start by thanking the two rapporteurs, Mrs Corbey, the rapporteur on the thematic strategy on air pollution, and Mr Krahmer, the rapporteur on the proposal for a directive on ambient air quality and cleaner air for Europe, and congratulating them on their exceptional and diligent work. I should also like to extend my especial thanks to the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety for its efforts so far.
Under the decision by the Council and Parliament on the Sixth Environment Action Programme, the Commission asked experts from the World Health Organisation to advise if the limit values which currently apply for air quality need to be changed. They replied that they did not. The Commission cannot, therefore, accept any watering down of the daily limit value for PM10. Amendments 46 and 81 increase the number of days on which this value may be exceeded from 35 to 55. If these amendments were to be accepted, then according to the statistics for 2004, there would no longer be any need for measures to combat air pollution in cities such as Vienna, Frankfurt, Bonn, Stuttgart and others. The basic question is: how can we best serve the health of our citizens? By watering down the daily limit value or by taking measures to combat the problem of pollution?
The amendment watering down the limit values likewise cannot be accepted, unless it is preceded by new Community measures to reduce pollution. It conflicts with the right of initiative of the institutions. It is also impracticable, because it is impossible to predict the results of measures which have not yet been proposed and, in this case, would undermine the right of the citizens to clean air.
I think I must stop here.
Air pollution is and will remain one of the most important public health problems. As a result of air pollution, life expectancy in the European Union today has fallen by 8.5 months. The quality of life of hundreds of thousands of people is reduced every day and the natural environment is in danger, despite the significant reductions in emissions achieved over recent years.
We need to step up our efforts. The strategy we propose defines the steps we need to make in this direction. It lays down new, unprecedented targets for health and the environment. The measures on small suspended particles will bring about a reduction in forecasts of premature deaths from approximately 350 000 today to 160 000 in 2020. That will be the outcome of the combined application of the strategy and other measures already agreed.
As far as the natural environment is concerned, we expect the size of ecosystems at risk of acidification to fall by over 50% and the size of ecosystems at risk due to the presence of excessive nitrogen levels to fall by over 30%. These are ambitious targets, the achievement of which will bring exponential environmental benefits.
The strategy will of course have to be applied effectively. The Commission has promised to propose measures at European Union level to improve ambient air. This will also address the problem of cross-border pollution. The strategy on air describes some of the related Community measures. The Commission has already tabled a proposal to reduce emissions from passenger cars and vans, often referred to as the Euro V proposal, and the Committee on the Environment recently approved its draft report. A Euro VI proposal is expected for cars and vans. Other Euro VI proposals will also be tabled for lorries and buses and the directive on national upper emission limits will also be reviewed, setting new emission limits for the Member States. Other measures for small-scale combustion and farming will follow when the time is right. All these measures are currently being prepared and will of course be evaluated in detail in accordance with the principles of better lawmaking.
One of the main elements of the strategy is the proposed review of current legislation on ambient air quality. The proposal maintains the current limit values for air quality. The official statistics of the World Health Organisation clearly confirm that these limit values are needed. The proposal introduces for the first time binding limits for small thin particles known as PM2.5, in other words particles with a diameter of less than 2.5 millionths of a metre. Scientists unanimously maintain that these particles have serious repercussions on public health. Maximum permissible concentration limits are proposed for entry into force in 2010. The proposal will, at the same time, require the Member States to start monitoring these thin particles carefully in all European countries. Measures will also be taken with a view to reducing the average levels of exposure to micro particles of the population. Approval of these measures must not be delayed. The repercussions on health are extremely serious and the data are incontrovertible. In the United States, PM2.5 targets have applied since 1995. The statistics included in the study on the repercussions of this proposal prove that the approach we propose of reducing exposure to micro particles will benefit more people at a lower cost that the lower PM2.5 limit proposed by Parliament. The Commission proposal also gives the Member States greater flexibility as far as their compliance with current limit values for air quality is concerned.
Uncontrolled emissions from natural sources are not included in the figures. A longer deadline will also be granted in cases where the Member States face acute compliance problems. These extensions must be as short as possible, in order to protect the health of our fellow citizens and not penalise the Member States which have made serious and credible efforts to comply.
I shall comment very briefly on some of the basic amendments proposed by Parliament: as regards the possibility of extending deadlines, the Commission proposes an additional five years from the date on which the limit values enter into force, in other words no later than the end of 2009, in conjunction with the facility to exclude emissions from natural sources. With these arrangements, the Member States will clearly be in a position to comply with the directive.
The Committee on the Environment has proposed two five-year periods from the date on which the new directive enters into force. Under this proposal, compliance will be delayed to 2018 for limit values already agreed in 1999. This cannot be accepted. The new amendment tabled before this plenary, Amendment 81, is a move in the right direction, but again cannot be accepted because, if we accept four plus two years from the entry into force of the new directive, this will delay compliance until 2013 for the limit values for PM10 already agreed in 1999. In other words, the Member States already recognised these limits back in 1999."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples