Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2008-04-24-Speech-4-010"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20080424.5.4-010"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, first of all I should like to express particular thanks to the shadow rapporteurs and the draftsmen of opinions for their valuable assistance.
I note that last June the Commission was to put forward a proposal for revision of the 'Eurovignette' directive, particularly by making the road transport charge variable. That principle of variability must be applied more and more when devising market-based instruments for the environment. The Commission is proposing a similar system for energy taxes, in which they would be made up of two components, an energy component and an environmental component.
If the revision of the directive achieves its purpose, it should also ensure that competitiveness with other means of transport is restored and that modes that emit less CO
are used.
Finally, there is one point to which I should like to draw particular attention: the competitiveness of the European economy. Of course we agree on this, but we have to be careful. The question that arises here is whether inaction would have a social, economic and environmental cost, as well as a political cost.
Today we can be satisfied with the balanced report adopted in the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety, which is the result of joint efforts. The European Union is unquestionably committed to the environment, both internally and at international level.
Having set a number of objectives in order to meet the urgent environmental needs facing us, the European Union has to devise ways of achieving them. To do that, it has, over the years, adopted legislation that is regularly revised and applicable in the Union. It invests in research, raises public awareness and encourages good practice by the Member States.
Now we are suggesting looking at another possibility, that of market-based instruments. The report is based on the Commission paper, which contains a number of proposals and ideas that I welcome. Firstly, it endeavours to improve on a text that, in my view, focuses a little too much on climate change. That is certainly a crucial issue, but we must not ignore the whole picture, all the fields of human activity whose impact on the environment is also very important.
Furthermore, I did not, unfortunately have any information from the consultation that might have helped us in our work. In the Green Paper, the Commission is proposing to achieve the environmental targets at a lower and a reasonable cost. That should be possible with the economic instruments which are, moreover, a flexible way of achieving the aims set.
Finally, the report suggests that the Commission should draw up an action plan or other system for a market-based instrument for the environment. I have a question for the Commission: can it tell us what stage it has reached in its discussions and whether the consultation results available to it at the moment will reinforce or amend the proposals in the Green Paper? I believe that is a very important question.
As regards the implementation of the market-based instruments, we must be guided by certain principles. We must, of course, apply the 'polluter pays' principle, ensure that the market-based instruments complement each other and complement other instruments, and that they are consistent and appropriate to the areas covered. That is the aim. In other words, we must not be systematic, but must show a great deal of ingenuity.
With regard to specific instruments, which I do not have time to discuss here, I must emphasise that Parliament is sceptical about the proposal on biodiversity, for the simple reason that it seems to us difficult, if not impossible, to compensate for a fairly unusual ecosystem in another country.
As for internalisation of the costs, that is a principle on which we have to base ourselves and for which we have to take steps. At the moment, very little account is taken of the environmental costs of human activities, particularly industrial and economic activities, in other words, to use a more technical term, the external costs. The transport sector is a typical example."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
"2"1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples