Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2009-03-10-Speech-2-396"

PredicateValue (sorted: default)
dcterms:Is Part Of
lpv:document identification number
lpv:translated text
"Mr President, the economy, the environment and people – these are the three cornerstones within which we must fit European law relating to road charging and the Eurovignette. When it comes to freight transport in Europe it is probably right to say that we must rank these three priorities differently, according to reverse alphabetical order, no less. We must now prioritise as follows: people first, then the environment, then the economy. We, the Commission and Parliament, want to do that. The Commission has produced a very sound proposal on the subject of internalising external costs, proposing a truer reflection of costs in transport – in freight transport, but not just there – and we have former Vice-President Barrot and current Vice-President Tajani to thank for that. We improved the proposal in the Committee on Transport and Tourism. In particular, we put an even greater emphasis on the concerns of those affected most – people, the environment and the economy. In this context I would like to offer my sincere thanks to the rapporteur, Mr El Khadraoui, and to all those who played their very constructive and active parts in this work. We have also kept a sense of proportion. Europe cannot and should not regulate everything and in every detail. The Member States, as the shapers of their own specific conditions, must also have their place. This also applies, and especially applies, to this much debated topic today, of congestion. In this case, it should not be about punishing those who find themselves stuck in congestion but about coming up with constructive solutions to help prevent it. Design should take precedence here, not bans. As is also frequently the case with our text, the devil is in the detail. In its original proposal, the Commission proposed, after careful cost calculations, to forget everything and have a final upper limit on costs after all. In the committee, we rejected that as nonsensical in the then Amendment 20. Tomorrow, this item will be voted on again as Amendment 40. The rapporteur is in favour. I ask all of you to support this item – we need to win this vote. In closing, I would like to say that I find it very regrettable that the Czech Presidency has not deemed it worth the effort to send a representative to Parliament for this important legislative proposal."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:


The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph