Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2007-12-10-Speech-1-090"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20071210.17.1-090"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, I too should like to thank the rapporteur, Mr Krahmer, and the shadow rapporteurs for their effective cooperation. Agreement with the Council at second reading is a success for the European Parliament. This agreement is a major step towards better air quality in Europe. However, we do need the assistance of all those involved. The cities and towns have to draw up clean air plans and create environmental zones, for example, if they do not keep to the limits. The Member States have to create the conditions for this – such as the enactment of the regulation on motor vehicle stickers in Germany, for example.
However, this is also called for in Europe. Only about 20-30% of air-borne soot particles come from inner-city traffic. It is only here, however, that the local authorities are able ultimately to have any influence. Local authorities have no chance of keeping to the limits if measures are not taken at European level to reduce emissions from sources other than transport. The measurement of emissions alone does not improve air quality. We need measures that combat the discharge of fine dust directly at source. This will provide genuine health protection.
The Commission has now also committed itself politically to taking these steps. It wants to make legislative proposals, such as the Euro 6 standard for lorries (which ultimately also leads to the compulsory introduction of soot particle filters), emission standards for smaller industrial installations and new regulations for ship’s engines. The local authorities’ measures must be flanked by these regulations in order to achieve a genuine improvement in air quality.
Firstly, there will be limits for the smallest dust particles. These particles are more harmful to human health because they can be breathed in. We therefore have to assess this. Through ambitious, yet realistic values we are sending out another signal for health protection. The legislator has demonstrated a sense of proportion here and at the same time ensured a high degree of health protection. Since we as Parliament have been able to achieve a good result on the smallest dust particles, we have accepted the Council’s position not to change anything in the existing PM
limits, including in daily limits. This also means, however, that there is no tightening of the annual PM
limits. The text of the Directive makes it explicitly clear that the local authorities are not obliged to take ineffective short-term measures such as road blocks, for example. The focus should be on long-term, sustainable measures such as environmental zones. Local authorities are already doing a great deal here and they should continue to do so.
Cities and towns, however, can in future apply for an extension to the deadline for meeting the existing PM
limits under strict conditions. This means, however – and I deliberately wish to emphasise this – no free ticket for local authorities. They cannot exceed the limits indefinitely and they can obtain a deadline extension only under two strict conditions: that they are suffering from unfavourable climatic conditions or unfavourable field conditions such as hot spots, for example, and they have taken all appropriate and reasonable measures at local level. This flexibility for local authorities contributes to the Directive’s practicability, without disregarding the level of health protection.
Ladies and gentlemen, we have put forward a responsible package. We have achieved progress on the health protection front."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
"10"1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples