Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2007-07-09-Speech-1-187"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20070709.20.1-187"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"(
) Mercury is used in many measuring devices, thermometers and barometers. Mercury has also been used successfully, and without major health implications, in dentistry in the form of amalgam fillings.
On the other hand, however, under certain circumstances mercury is known to be harmful and can accumulate in living organisms, including the human body. We are all aware that the Council’s joint position includes most of the amendments already adopted by the European Parliament on 14 November 2006. This was reflected in the text, where the rapporteur and shadow rapporteurs see almost eye to eye, so that we were close to finalising the legislative process during the first reading.
There is a major point of difference between the Council and Parliament, however, concerning the production of devices which use mercury, notably barometers. As we know, Parliament voted in favour of a complete exemption, whereas the Council is proposing an exemption limited to two years, which appears to be appropriate. A ban would apply to new mercury barometers, but it seems sensible to regard second-hand barometers as acceptable, as this would make possible their continued sale, repair and maintenance.
As a citizen and consumer, I support the type of compromise backed by the rapporteur, which will not jeopardise the overall health of the general public and will enable conventional barometer manufacturers to adapt more quickly to the new situation."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
"SK"1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples