Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2007-12-10-Speech-1-092"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20071210.17.1-092"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, clean air is a basic necessity of life. Air has become cleaner over the last 30 years, but is still far too polluted. Compliance with the directives currently in force is inadequate. The Directive on ambient air quality needs to be revised if we are to tackle pollution more effectively. Last week, Parliament and the Council reached agreement on the new Directive. I welcome the outcome and wish to thank Mr Krahmer, Mrs Weisgerber and the other shadow rapporteurs for their constructive cooperation over the last two years. I should like to highlight three points.
First of all, the stricter standards. My group has been consistently committed to more ambitious standards for particulates and other pollutants harmful to humans and the environment, and so I am pleased that, thanks to us, there is to be a new standard for microparticulates. Microparticulate pollution can neither be seen nor smelt, but is responsible for the most health damage, leading to hundreds of thousands of premature deaths among Europeans. Large numbers of people suffer from asthma and other complaints. The new standard will enable us to take a much more targeted approach to tackling this health damage.
This agreement is therefore good news for public health. Parliament did not resign itself to the lukewarm ambition of the Commission and the Council; we called for greater commitment, and obtained it. The PM
standard was to be reduced from 25 to 20 micrograms. According to scientists, this will increase average life expectancy by a further four to five months. However, even the new standards are not enough. Further improvements are still required, including more attention being given to children. Ultimately, we must arrive at a standard of no more than 10 micrograms of particulate matter per cubic metre of air. This is the ceiling recommended by the World Health Organization, and guarantees genuinely clean air. The present Directive is a step in the right direction.
The second point is that Europe must not only set sound standards, but also develop instruments to meet these objectives. After all, Europe is often good at setting general policy objectives, but much less effective when it comes to creating the right instruments for actually meeting those objectives. Without cleaner cars, ships, agriculture and industry the air-quality standards will remain a paper tiger.
We recently voted on Euro V and Euro VI: cleaner passenger cars from 2009 and even cleaner cars from 2014. This kind of legislation must be introduced quickly for heavy goods vehicles and buses. Parliament has urged the Council and the Commission to hasten to make complementary policy to tackle the sources of pollution. This has resulted in a Commission statement listing all the measures to be taken in coming years. The statement will be annexed to the Directive, and will make reference to the Directive. This is a clear political signal to the public that Europe is taking action and launching cleanup operations in all manner of sectors.
A third point of discussion has been the flexibility of the standards. Twenty-four Member States cannot meet the standards laid down by the existing Directive. That does not strike me as a good example of effective legislation. My position has always been that it is quite acceptable for Member States who are taking a number of measures but are unable to meet the standards to be given extra time to tackle hotspots; provided, however, that much stricter standards are introduced in the medium term. It is very important that the legislation we produce here is workable and practicable.
Today we are showing that the European Parliament takes complaints from Member States about impracticable legislation seriously. Experience has taught us that the air does not become any cleaner if we neglect the implementation of the Directive. The new Directive on ambient air quality is an improvement on the old. Better, stricter standards are good news for public health, local authorities and construction firms alike. We can breathe again!"@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples