Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2008-02-19-Speech-2-018"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2008-02-19"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Accreditation and market surveillance relating to the marketing of products - Common framework for the marketing of products - Application of certain national technical rules to products lawfully marketed in another Member State - Safety marking on consumer products (debate)2
dcterms:Language	"de"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20080219.5.2-018"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2008-02-19-Speech-2-0192
lpv:speaker	lp:Peter Liese2
lpv:spokenAs	member; EPP-ED (2004-07-20--2009-07-13)3 unknown; Christlich Demokratische Union Deutschlands (2004-07-20--2009-07-13)3 member; Delegation for relations with the countries of Central America (2007-03-14--2009-07-13)3 member; Delegation to the Euro-Latin American Parliamentary Assembly (2007-05-23--2009-07-13)3 member; ENVI (2007-02-15--2009-07-13)3 substitute; AFET (2007-05-24--2009-07-13)3 substitute; Delegation to the EU-Mexico Joint Parliamentary Committee (2004-09-15--2009-07-13)3 substitute; Temporary Committee on Climate Change (2007-05-10--2009-02-04)3
lpv:translated text	". Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, I speak as the rapporteur of the Environment Committee on the Brie report and intend to focus primarily on market surveillance, which has been a major concern of ours in the Committee. Over the past few months people have often asked what ‘CE’ actually means, what those two letters stand for. As we know, they actually signify compliance with European rules, but in the course of the CE discussion a joke has been doing the rounds that CE actually stands for ‘Chinese export’. It is a sad fact that the CE mark is being used by manufacturers who do not adhere to the rules. That is not always the case, but I am afraid abuses are rife in the Far East. This practice is unacceptable because it poses risks to consumers, to public health and to the environment, but it is also detrimental to the companies that play by the rules. Let me say quite clearly that compliance with European rules must not make any company less competitive, nor should any company stand to gain by flouting them. For this reason, the Environment Committee has argued in the past, for example in connection with the Eco-design of Energy-using Products Directive, for more rigorous market surveillance. It is therefore gratifying that the Commission has made this proposal. We believe it has taken too long to do so, but better late than never. Accordingly, we welcome the fact that rapid agreement has now been reached. Just like the Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection, the Environment Committee takes the view that the transitional periods proposed by the Commission were far too long. We should ensure that these rules enter into force as soon as possible. The compromise date of 1 January 2010 is not what we wanted, but at least it is an improvement on the Commission’s proposal, as is the case in many other areas. I appeal to the Member States to make the necessary manpower available and to enact the requisite measures so that market surveillance really is improved quickly and we do not have to use the transitional period. We must act very swiftly for the sake of consumers and for the sake of honest companies."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph