Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2010-09-21-Speech-2-745"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2010-09-21"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Inclusion of aviation activities in the scheme for greenhouse gas emission allowance trading within the Community (debate)2
dcterms:Language	"de"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20100921.24.2-745"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2010-09-21-Speech-2-7462
lpv:speaker	lp:Michael Cramer2
lpv:spokenAs	unknown; Bündnis 90/Die Grünen (2009-07-14--2014-06-30)3 member; Delegation for relations with Australia and New Zealand (2009-09-16--2014-06-30)3 member; G/EFA (2009-07-14--2014-06-30)3 member; Delegation to the EU-Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia Joint Parliamentary Committee (2009-10-07--2014-06-30)3 member; TRAN (2009-07-16--2012-01-18)3 substitute; Delegation for relations with South Africa (2009-09-16--2014-06-30)3
lpv:translated text	"Commissioner, thank you very much for your clear statements. I hope that you will be able to see this through in the negotiations. After all, one of the reasons why Copenhagen was such a flop and a disaster was that the European Union had no objectives. It was like a game of ‘pick-up sticks’; whoever is the first to move loses. That is indeed what happened and we need to change that. The European Union’s position must therefore be quite clear. To recap: the emissions trading system was introduced and accepted by most airlines as a way of avoiding a kerosene tax. We also know, however, that European taxpayers hand the airlines EUR 30 billion every year in waivers of VAT and kerosene tax. This means that if the airlines and the other countries do not want to take part in emissions trading, then we need to introduce a kerosene tax. That would be much more expensive, and that is what this is really all about. Nonetheless, we know that aviation is very dangerous, and emissions in the air are three or four times as harmful as those at ground level. Despite this, it is vehemently supported by European taxpayers. There are no airspace access charges; these exist only over Siberia. Why not? The railways have to pay track access charges. Ticket prices, compensation rights for passengers – on the railways, you get your money back, or part of it back, after just one hour. For flights, it is only after three hours. Moreover, we have not forgotten that in emissions trading, 85% of certificates are given to airlines without charge. The railways get nothing given to them – they have to buy every single one. These unfair framework conditions need to be changed, otherwise we can forget about our climate targets. Nobody wants that."@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