Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2015-10-28-Speech-3-111-000"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20151028.6.3-111-000"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Madam President, Europe needs to take action to clean up its air. That is the key message of the review of the NEC Directive that will be voting on in a couple of hours. We need to set ambitious targets on key pollutants taking us forward to 2030 and beyond.
The reason why is obvious, but let me spell it out: air pollution is the number one environmental cause of death in the EU. Over 400 000 of our citizens die prematurely each year and millions more suffer debilitating illness, medication and hospitalisation. This has an enormous human and economic cost: tens of billions of euros in days lost at work, and even more spent on health care bills. Air pollution also hits the natural environment through eutrophication and acid deposition.
So, in December 2013, the Commission published its clean air package, which includes the NEC Directive. The central plank of the proposal is the setting of emissions reductions targets in all Member States for 2030, for six pollutants. This proposal was accompanied by a 352-page impact assessment. This file has had a difficult passage through the process. Parliament agreed to commission an additional impact assessment of our own, which was finally published in October 2014, after the European elections. At the same time, the Commission’s Work Programme suggested that they were considering withdrawing the whole proposal, and a lot of time and effort went into ensuring that this did not happen. I still feel strongly, as your rapporteur, that this is a key issue that is best tackled at EU level. Air pollution does not stop at Member State borders. I passionately believe that better regulation and good air quality are not mutually exclusive, and this is why I fought so hard to keep this proposal alive. This is a very important point for me because, having invested so much time and political capital into making sure the proposal stayed on the table, it really is imperative that we vote responsibly today, finding a consensus that garners broad support on all the key issues. That means not supporting the Environment Committee’s position on lower ceilings across all pollutants, and supporting amendments on ammonia. There will be very many people here who will say that this is not ambitious enough, that we need to push further, but I would like them to take another look at the facts.
The proposal I am supporting delivers a 52% improvement in health outcomes. It rejects the Commission’s proposed flexibility for shipping, has added mandatory targets for 2025 on all pollutants, offers vastly improved access to justice for citizens affected by poor air quality, as well as improvements on national air pollution control programs and reporting. This will help all levels of government in Member States, including the regional and sub-regional authorities that have engaged so vigorously in the lobbying process.
Frankly, this is the first time that I have ever experienced this so starkly with regional authorities: a real bottom-up demand for action. My report pushes the Commission to ensure that the RDE legislation is agreed as soon as possible. We all agree that NOx must be dealt with urgently. The public are demanding action in this area following the recent revelations from the car industry.
What about agriculture? Across Europe farmers are concerned about demands to decrease output of ammonia. If they are going to achieve this, they will need help, both technically and financially. That is why I have proposed an amendment asking for a review of ammonia targets by 2022 in line with scientific evidence and a new article on access to funding, calling on the Commission to support farmers through its mid-term review of CAP greening. So, to those of you who are thinking of voting for even tougher targets, let me just say: think very carefully. We do not currently have a position from Council on this file. We do know that many Member States, including some of the biggest, have not yet presented their positions. They are waiting for this plenary vote to see where Parliament will go, so let us not signal intransigence. Let us not choose political grandstanding. Let us not play to the gallery. The EP should be ambitious, but also pragmatic. Let us strike the right balance and get this dossier moving quickly towards trialogue.
I do not want to be responsible for any more delay – let us give our citizens a rapid route to improved air quality. It is what they demand, and it is what they deserve.
Finally, can I just say a big thank you to all the shadow rapporteurs, thank you for your help, and a special mention for Kateřina Konečná from the GUE/NGL Group who cannot be with us today as she delivered her baby boy a few days ago. I am sure we all wish to send her our congratulations."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata | |
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples