Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2010-11-22-Speech-1-182"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20101122.18.1-182"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Madam President, Mr Potočnik, the Commissioner responsible for this file, is here with me, but unfortunately he has to remain silent because of a problem with his throat. I know that he has been working on this file for a long time, so I will do my best to be his voice.
Finally, the Commission also regrets the lack of support for the provision, including in the Commission proposal, making the establishment of correlation tables obligatory. The Commission accepted the substitution of the obligatory provision by a recital encouraging Member States to follow this practice in order to facilitate a first-reading agreement, but it states that this should not be seen to be a precedent. We will continue to work with the colegislators in an effort to find a horizontal solution to this horizontal institutional issue.
The Commission can accept the compromise package in order to reach an agreement on this directive at first reading. I would encourage Parliament to adopt the same position.
We stand on the threshold of a first-reading agreement on the recast of the directive on the restriction of hazardous substances in electrical and electronic equipment – the RoHS agreement. We would not have reached this point if it were not for the hard work of the European Parliament on this important dossier. I would like to thank and congratulate the rapporteur, Jillian Evans, as well as the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety, for the excellent work carried out on this proposal.
RoHS has been a successful piece of legislation since it was adopted in 2003. It has prevented thousands of tonnes of banned substances from being thrown away and potentially released into the environment. It has brought about important changes in the design of electronic products in the European Union and worldwide. Other countries, including the EU’s major trading partners, have followed the EU’s example and brought in similar legislation.
We use enormous and increasing amounts of electronic equipment, which contain a lot of metal resources. A computer, for example, contains over 60 raw materials. On average, each EU citizen produces 25 kg of electronic waste every year. This law will ensure that electronic products are freed from many hazardous substances and will make this large waste stream easier to recycle. This law therefore also helps make the EU more resource-efficient, in line with our Europe 2020 strategy.
However, industry and Member States alike have reported the risk of inadequate or inefficient implementation and enforcement of the directive. The status quo is insufficient, not only in terms of protection of the environment, but also in terms of creating a level playing field within the EU. Therefore, it is important that this law be clarified and streamlined. The key element for the Commission is to ensure alignment with REACH, but real environmental benefits only arise when a law is properly implemented and enforced at national level. I hope that the introduction of the common definitions and assessment tools of the new legislative framework for the marketing of products in this law will significantly improve this.
In addition, the directive’s environmental ambition is improved through the extension of the product coverage, first by the two new categories – medical devices and monitoring and control instruments – and, in eight years, to all electronic products. Further extensions to the scope of this law will further increase the environmental benefits, but economic operators should, of course, have sufficient time to adapt, and all scope changes should be based on solid information. The Commission will therefore review the scope changes as regards the current law, which have not yet been subject to impact assessments. The Commission would therefore like to clarify the issue by making two statements.
First, on the scope, the Commission interprets that it follows from Article 2(1a) that during the transitional period of eight years, Member States are obliged to allow electrical and electronic equipment that was outside the scope of Directive 2002/95/EC, but which would be covered by the new directive, to continue to be made available on their market.
Second, concerning the review pursuant to Article 19, the Commission intends to undertake, no later than three years after the entry into force of this directive, an impact assessment focusing on the changes in scope. This review may result in the Commission making a legislative proposal in line with its right of legislative initiative in the treaties.
We would also like to make the following declarations as regards nanomaterials. We note that work towards a common definition on nanomaterials is still ongoing within the Commission. We intend to adopt a recommendation on such a common definition for all legislative sectors in the near future. The Commission considers that the RoHS provision covered different forms, including nanoforms, of the substances which are currently banned, and those which, in the future, will be subject to a priority review under RoHS."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata | |
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples