Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-01-18-Speech-2-095"

PredicateValue (sorted: default)
rdf:type
dcterms:Date
dcterms:Is Part Of
dcterms:Language
lpv:document identification number
"en.20000118.4.2-095"2
lpv:hasSubsequent
lpv:speaker
lpv:spokenAs
lpv:translated text
"Last October I expressed my views on the Hatzidakis report on the transport of dangerous goods by rail. The views I shall express today are not far removed from those I had then. Essentially, my opinion is as follows: I deplore the fact that, in a field as crucial as the transport of dangerous goods, we keep putting off the adoption of harmonised standards to the detriment of human beings and the environment. I shall point out that a directive on the approximation of Member State legislation on the transport of dangerous goods by road came into force on 1 January 1997. This included a number of interim conditions valid until 1 January 1999. This is the time when we should have expressed our opinion of the Commission proposal to put an end to the derogations. In line with the usual procedure, it is the European Committee for Standardisation (CEN) which puts forward standards in this area, and they are then integrated in to the European Agreement concerning the International Carriage of Dangerous Goods by Road signed in Geneva in 1957 (known generally as ADR), applicable throughout Europe, whose terms and conditions form the basis for the legislation applicable within the EU. The CEN has been unable to complete its work in the time allotted. Consequently, the Commission proposal under discussion today is intended to amend the directive in order to provide a short-term solution to these problems, rather than to put an end to the transitional arrangements, as should have been the case! This is exactly what happened in the case of transport of such goods by rail, except for the fact that a time limit had been decided. Right now we do not have the slightest idea as to when the CEN will be in a position to put forward practical proposals. Until then, there is really no point in Member States amending their national regulations. The report also accepts that some flexibility may be adopted, and grants States the option of adopting or applying alternative standards. They may, therefore, continue to enforce their own standards regarding certain types of pressure vessel used for transportation, where there are no applicable European standards. They may also adopt alternative conditions for transportation of a local nature and for ad hoc transportation. In offering this explanation of my vote, therefore, I wished to express my deep dissatisfaction and my deep concern."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

1http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/English.ttl.gz
2http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/Events_and_structure.ttl.gz
3http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/spokenAs.ttl.gz

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph