Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2012-05-10-Speech-4-387-000"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20120510.69.4-387-000"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"The aim of the Rotterdam Convention, which is being implemented in the EU, is to promote information exchange about chemicals being traded between parties to the convention, and also to implement the prior informed consent procedure when a party to the convention exports chemicals subject to the convention to another party to the convention. It was important to change the rules of prior informed consent in order to make it easier for exporters of chemicals to export in cases where no response is forthcoming. The Commission argues that if a country does not respond to an export request, it might be because the authorities in that country do not feel the need to respond to requests regarding chemicals that are not listed in the Rotterdam Convention, but only in EU legislation. It might also be the case, however, that the country has a very weak administration and is therefore not capable of responding in time. In such cases, it seems very problematic, in my view, to allow the export of dangerous chemicals to these countries. If their administration is not able to react to an export request, it is not likely that the same administration is able to protect the citizens or the environment from dangerous chemicals. The EU is a leader when it comes to environmental legislation, and it should remain so. I firmly believe that it is the responsibility of the EU to ensure that the chemicals we export do not cause unnecessary harm to human health or the environment."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples