Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2009-03-10-Speech-2-265"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20090310.28.2-265"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"We strongly support the original IPPC Directive. Industrial activities covered by existing Directives emit 55% of the EU’s CO
emissions, 83% of SO
and 34% of NOx. Under the current directive, permits are issued by the Environment Protection Agency which require industrial plants to apply ‘Best Available Techniques’.
During the vote this morning, there were a number of problematic amendments regarding the new IPPC proposal.
1. Minimum Requirements. Ireland is against the minimum requirements amendment, as this will penalise Irish industry and the work recently undertaken to achieve the status of the current directive. Resources would be better spent enforcing the directive in those Member States which are non compliant.
2. Poultry and Manure and Slurry. There were a number of amendments seeking to bring more poultry and manure spreading within the scope. I have voted against this amendment to avoid double regulation, as the Nitrates Directive suffices on manure and slurry. On poultry, the IPPC already controls 40 000 poultry places. An amendment would reduce the threshold values from 40 000 to 30 000 for laying hens, 24 000 for ducks and 11 500 for turkeys. There is nothing stated in the impact assessment about how these numbers came about and on what scientific basis they were established.
2. Instalments. I also voted in favour of flexibility for instalments"@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
"2"1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples