Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2007-11-14-Speech-3-269"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20071114.32.3-269"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"We will soon be deciding how we will be able to combat global warming after 2012 when the Kyoto Agreement comes to an end.
We have a very good basis. We need reductions of up to 80% by 2050, assistance for developing countries to reduce their emissions, measures against the meat industry, which is responsible for almost one fifth of global emissions of greenhouse gases, more flexible patent laws which make it easier to spread green technology, certification of biofuels to avoid them coming into conflict with food supplies, and the conservation of the world’s forests. As has been said, this is all wonderful.
What is missing and what we must do in the future is to take measures against the constantly growing flows of traffic within the EU, EU subsidies and the fact that markets tend to be given priority when the EU legislates and implements.
There are eleven amendments, most of which I think are good and strengthen the thrust of the resolution, which is that it is the rich world which is responsible for climate change and must therefore take the lead in radical reductions.
I am troubled by Amendment 7, which aims to use nuclear power to combat the greenhouse effect. We should not replace one environmental problem with new problems."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples