Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2010-03-10-Speech-3-445"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20100310.24.3-445"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
"With regard to the intervention on the subject of nuclear security, I must say that the responsibility, which in this area is national, is provided for in the international agreements of the International Atomic Energy Agency, in other words, in the Convention on Nuclear Safety to which Belarus, Russia, Euratom and the majority of the Member States of the European Union are parties.
The Council understands that contracting parties that are located close to a proposed nuclear facility should be consulted, as they could be affected by it. Therefore, the agreement that is currently being concluded between Euratom and Russia, in relation to the peaceful application of nuclear energy, will have to contain provisions on the verifiable requirements on nuclear safety and protecting the health and safety of workers. I would also like to remind you that this issue is dealt with periodically in the context of the dialogue between the European Union and Russia on energy.
With regard to assessing the consequences in an international context, the Council observes that Belarus is a party to the Espoo Convention on Environmental Impact Assessment in a Transboundary Context, which contains binding obligations aimed at assessing the environmental consequences and possible environmental risks. In this case, however, the Council says that the responsibility for organising environmental assessment lies largely with the developers of the projects.
The Russian Federation is not a contracting party to this Convention. We would like Russia to apply the Espoo Convention voluntary in any case. It has also been doing so for some time in relation to existing nuclear power stations.
Finally, with regard to the question put by the honourable Member regarding human rights in relation to Russia, there was a previous debate in which questions were raised in relation to human rights, and I think that the criteria for defending human rights or reporting human rights violations apply wherever they take place. Therefore, no country is exempt from violations being condemned by right – and I would even say out of moral obligation – and we do condemn and should condemn these violations when they take place within the European Union or in one of its countries.
Linking this with visa policy is a leap that is currently very difficult to establish or specify. General negotiations are in progress on visas. I think that it is in the context of these general negotiations on visas that someone could suggest another type of specific channel for facilitating visas, but as I said, at the moment, we are in very broad negotiations on visas with Russia, and I think that this is what we need to focus on: on the organisation of visas in general terms.
This is because it is what could really have the best impact in terms of the free movement of people, and even, I would say, offer the best opportunity as regards Europeans and Europe as a whole for their values to be lived and shared by other members of the public and in places outside of the European Union."@en1
|
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples