Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2012-01-18-Speech-3-326-000"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20120118.25.3-326-000"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, I would like to start at the very heart of the matter by explaining what exactly we are talking about when we mention waste electrical and electronic equipment, because many people will say: all this stuff about waste electrical and electronic equipment really does not matter very much. One million mobile phones contain 250 kg of silver, 24 kg of gold, 9 kg of palladium and 9 tonnes of copper. One tonne of mobile phones contains 50 times more gold than one tonne of the earth from which gold is extracted. This illustrates just how valuable raw materials are and it can be shocking to learn just how casually materials are illegally shipped from Europe. Waste is exported to Africa, India and China, where it is recycled under ruinous environmental standards; while we can achieve 90% quality with our recycling and reuse, other countries compare quite badly with only around 18 or 19%.
The significance is clear. For this reason, I am actually quite happy that we have taken the right approach with some of the fundamental questions in this directive: illegal shipments of waste are becoming rarer because we have introduced the reversal of the burden of proof. Yet, we are once again faced with the question of whether Member States, including my own country, are really prepared and able to provide personnel to enforce these regulations at the customs posts in our ports.
Which brings us to another important point, namely collection targets. These collection targets have been significantly increased. Sweden manages to collect 16 kg while one wonderful country to the south with a city with which I share my name collects a paltry three kilos. On the one hand, we have a marvellous achievement and, on the other, a disaster. The collection quotas in many of the founding Member States of the Union are 3 and 4 kg per person. This will be seen by our children as a sign of our inadequacies, because we are selling off our raw materials or sending them to the waste tip, where no one will ever be able to reach them.
Luckily, we have reached these collection targets. Unfortunately, we have had to deal with an extremely phlegmatic institution of the European Union in the Council, which has shown itself to be not particularly friendly towards Europe throughout the negotiations. Let me give you an example: if a business in Europe produces a light bulb today, then sometime in the future it is going to have to bring it for recycling. It then has to register 27 times in 27 different countries so that the recycling issue can be clarified.
This is national politics at its worst. It is astonishing that a single registration suffices when it comes to the different VAT regimes, but not recycling. This is a tragedy for the Council. It is unfortunate that the Council has had its way here and that the small and medium-sized enterprises that produce light bulbs will have to register them separately in each of the 27 Member States of the Union in future. This alone will cost EUR 60 million per year for each individual process. I consider this to be disastrous.
Although some red tape has been done away with, the Council naturally sees the money that businesses have to pay as an attractive source of income. Unfortunately, it is the Council and the Member States that have control of this money, leading to major toing and froing when a light bulb is first sold in France and then supplied to Italy through a dealer. An enormous amount of money moves around, something that could be managed much more easily through the use of modern technology.
Mr Potočnik, I am personally very grateful to you and your staff for having played such a decisive role in the process. If it were not for you, these negotiations would have failed.
The Council has behaved in a way I have not seen before in my 22 years of experience. I include my own country in this. The determination to link European environmental policy with economic criteria has declined to sorry proportions. Miserable national policies are being pursued, while we have not even managed to come up with a Europe-wide definition of the term ‘recycling’. The Member States can all do what they want.
We have started along the right path. Nonetheless, we have a lot of work to do in getting the Council to move in the right direction. To reiterate, my criticisms are directed at everyone, not just one individual. Thank you very much for your patience."@en1
|
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples