Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/1999-12-15-Speech-3-036"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"1999-12-15"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Climate change2
dcterms:Language	"sv"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.19991215.3.3-036"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:1999-12-15-Speech-3-0372
lpv:speaker	lp:Per-Arne Arvidsson2
lpv:spokenAs	member; Delegation to the EU-Czech Republic Joint Parliamentary Committee (1999-10-06--2002-01-14)3 member; Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 member; EPP-ED (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 substitute; Delegation to the European Economic Area Joint Parliamentary Committee (EEA) (1999-10-08--2002-01-14)3 unknown; Moderata samlingspartiet (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 substitute; Committee on Culture, Youth, Education, the Media and Sport (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, in common with other speakers, I should like to begin by emphasising the need to reduce carbon dioxide emissions and to reduce the effect upon the climate. The present resolution is a good one but, following the discussion by the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy, two flaws have become apparent. Firstly, there is a reference to nuclear power which is not directly connected to the resolution’s main purpose. In my opinion, it would have been better to leave out completely the lines about nuclear power in the resolution but, since this has not been done, I would ask to support Mr Liese’s amendment. Secondly, the resolution is deficient when it recommends general energy taxes and carbon dioxide taxes. The majority of the Group of the European People’s Party and European Democrats have their doubts about an EU tax of this kind and, on the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy, voted against the proposal in this part of the resolution. General taxes on industry are a blunt instrument for obtaining measures to reduce carbon dioxide emissions. To present energy taxes as the most important measure is simply to engage in empty rhetoric. I believe instead that we should be encouraging the individual EU States to take responsibility for achieving the required level of reductions in carbon dioxide emissions. It is therefore up to the individual Member States to find the most effective tools, best suited to their own national circumstances, for achieving the objectives in question. Specifically targeted charges on carbon dioxide emissions should be more effective than general taxes, but there are also other options for individual Member States. If need be, general EU taxes can be given an overarching dimension. In my opinion, the prerequisites for devising tax instruments and tax legislation differ very considerably from one EU country to the next. By supporting the proposal for EU taxes in the energy sphere, I do not want to be a party to adopting a principle which limits the individual EU countries’ autonomy in tax matters. There are members of the Group of the European People’s Party and European Democrats who, because of the above-mentioned contents of the text of the resolution, intend to vote against the resolution in its entirety. I personally am going to vote in favour of the resolution, but with the reservations I have just mentioned."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph