Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2009-03-10-Speech-2-395"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2009-03-10"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:The charging of heavy goods vehicles for the use of certain infrastructures - Greening of transport and internalisation of external costs (continuation of debate)2
dcterms:Language	"nl"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20090310.34.2-395"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2009-03-10-Speech-2-3962
lpv:speaker	lp:Johannes Blokland2
lpv:spokenAs	chair_of_the_bureau; IND/DEM (2008-05-09--2009-07-13)3 vice-chair; ENVI (2007-02-01--2009-07-13)3 member; Delegation to the EU-Armenia, EU-Azerbaijan and EU-Georgia Parliamentary Cooperation Committees (2004-09-15--2009-07-13)3 member; Delegation to the EU-Kazakhstan, EU-Kyrgyzstan and EU-Uzbekistan Parliamentary Cooperation Committees, and for relations with Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Mongolia (2004-09-15--2009-07-13)3 substitute; TRAN (2007-01-31--2009-07-13)3 unknown; ChristenUnie - Staatkundig Gereformeerde Parti (2004-07-20--2009-07-13)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, following a long, tiring debate, we are on the verge of adopting Parliament’s position at first reading. I am fairly pleased with the result, and very pleased with the cooperation with the rapporteur. It is good that Member States are to be given the opportunity to pass on external costs to the polluter. Let us not hesitate to pass on the costs of congestion, air and noise pollution to what will ultimately be the consumer. I do take the view, though, that Member States must retain the scope to vary the costs. In addition, it must be possible to trace back the burdens imposed clearly and transparently to the actual costs incurred. We cannot allow Member States to introduce a kind of punitive tax. Amendment 40 will therefore have to be removed from the report. I should also like the Council to tell me whether it shares Parliament’s view that the revenues from the Eurovignette must be used to reduce the external costs. This is essential to my support for the Eurovignette Directive. In addition, this proposal must not remain isolated. Lorries are not the only road users responsible for congestion costs; other modes of transport generate them too. With the exception of maritime and air transport, which will be covered by the Emissions Trading Scheme, these hauliers too must pay their external costs. This is a fair way of encouraging hauliers to clean up their act. I should also like to take this opportunity to request support for my Amendment 76. I do not understand why the Commission decided to change the old text on regulatory charges to ‘any urban road’. The imposition of such regulatory charges is a national competence. It is the Member States who must decide on the way they wish to impose such a regulatory charge, provided it is non-discriminatory, of course. I propose that we return to the old text from 2006, therefore, and I ask for your support for this. On a final note, it is of the utmost importance that the Commission ensures that the Member States do not use this directive to impose unduly high charges on freight transport. The Commission must take very seriously its tasks under Article 11(1). If a Member State makes a mockery of the external cost charge calculation or of the maximum value, the Commission must come down hard on that Member State."@en1
lpv:videoURI	<go to Events_and_structure europarl>2

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph