Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2009-10-20-Speech-2-079"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20091020.5.2-079"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, I have noticed that the vote which took place yesterday in the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety has been mentioned several times.
I would, however, like to make it clear that not everything can be put down to one single extremist ideological position. We have heard many positions of our fellow Members which are very diverse, much more nuanced, based much more on common sense and therefore, given that they reflect reality more closely, I think that they are more likely to provide real solutions.
Science is not a totem. When the mistake was made to pick out one issue in such an ideological way, solutions were not provided but it led to disaster. Europe should be an expert at this, at not repeating the same mistakes, albeit when they take different forms and have labels which appear, on the surface, much friendlier. I must point out that the emissions trading directive itself stipulates precisely that the virtuous path followed by the European Union must be assessed by the Commission, according to the outcome of the conference.
We must go to the conference with strong positions and clear ideas certainly, but also with the absolute aim of sharing our efforts fairly among, first and foremost, all the industrialised countries, which must accept equivalent emissions reduction targets. We must also keep in mind what Mrs Grossetête expressed very well, namely that we can no longer fail to differentiate between developing countries: some countries truly are developing and some are newly emerged economies, such as India, China and Brazil. These, too, are countries which must shoulder commitments of their own.
Well, if a balanced outcome is not achieved in Copenhagen, I, on the other hand, strongly urge the European Union to continue to ensure that allowances are allocated free of charge to sectors at risk, in accordance with Directive 2003/87/EC. These are key points. We want the Kyoto Protocol itself to retain its importance for the environment and, above all, we want to avoid creating a financial bubble at the expense of European businesses."@en1
|
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples