Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-12-13-Speech-3-165"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20061213.27.3-165"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
REACH is an extremely important step in terms of the EU’s chemical policy. The reversal of the duty of care principle, which shifts from the public authorities to industry and manufacturers, is a phenomenal revolution for the entire sector. One cannot underestimate, either, the tremendous gain in knowledge that will result from the registration, evaluation and authorisation process. This gain in knowledge will have consequences for industry as a whole and for our means of preserving humankind and the environment.
The only remaining big regret is that the principle of substitution for ‘extremely worrying’ chemical substances will not be as binding as one might have wished. Let us hope that, in the near future, this principle will be taken up and accepted by the two European co-legislators and that we will not have to wait 20 years for that, as we have done for this directive.
To have rejected the entire REACH legislation because of this regret would have been like throwing the baby out with the bathwater, and that would certainly not have led to better legislation in the short or medium term.
I call on the future agency to remain pragmatic in its attitude towards certain well-known substances
such as lime, for example
the use of which does not, in principle, present any problems."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples