Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2011-06-07-Speech-2-100-000"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20110607.7.2-100-000"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, as we all know, this directive is a compromise. However, it is, without doubt, also a good compromise, as it accommodates both sides, at least to a certain extent – both the carriers and the citizens, who have to suffer the noise and the exhaust gases. What are the advantages of this directive? For me, there are three.
Firstly, there is the earmarking of the revenue from road charges for investment in improved transport infrastructure, which is in the public economic interest and provides increased safety and better transport routes. Secondly, there is the standardisation of collection, which lowers costs and prevents traffic congestion. Thirdly – and very importantly – there is the fact that it gives the Member States the ability and the freedom to factor costs such as noise and pollutant emissions into their road charges at a future point. These, then, are control mechanisms.
Those who steer clear of rush hours and traffic jams will pay less and those who drive clean and quiet goods vehicles will enjoy lower costs. I hope that these incentives will mean that, in future, traffic jams will be avoided and goods vehicle fleets will be renewed. All in all, we are aware that not all wishes could be satisfied in the negotiations, but these positive aspects that we were able to achieve in the negotiations thanks to Parliament’s strength should lead to the desired positive effects.
I also hope that there is not too much bureaucracy in the implementation, as that would harm the whole."@en1
|
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples