Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-02-03-Speech-4-014"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2000-02-03"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:End-of-life vehicles2
dcterms:Language	"en"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20000203.1.4-014"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2000-02-03-Speech-4-0152
lpv:speaker	lp:John Bowis2
lpv:spoken text	"Mr President, this directive deals with the comparatively small but growing problem of abandoned cars and the question of a more structured disposal of all cars at the end of their life. To that extent, it might be thought desirable, even if it is not a matter of urgent necessity. The key questions now are who pays the EUR 262 per car for the 9 million cars that are disposed of each year? Who pays for the collection, the dismantling, the disposal and so on? And should the directive be retrospective to cover every car that has ever been made? The proposal from the Council, the common position, is that manufacturers should pay the lot. That would mean billions of pounds or euros for each of the major companies in each of the countries of the European Union. That cost would inevitably be passed on to the price and hence to the buyers of new cars. Because European car manufactures have been operating here for many, many more decades than companies from Japan, Korea and elsewhere, that would be a much greater burden on the older European companies and a competitive gift to their competitors from elsewhere. I commend Mr Florenz, Mr Lange and others who have sought from both sides of the party divide a compromise based on shared costs. I also commend to you the amendment standing in my name and colleagues from Germany, Italy, Ireland, Spain, Sweden and Britain, to remove the retrospective nature of this measure. Retrospective law is bad law, it is unfair law and often it is unworkable law. Most democratic parliaments in the free world reject it on principle unless there is overwhelming public interest, which clearly there is not in this case. That is why I have called for a roll-call vote on this. We can see who is prepared to vote for a retrospection which is of doubtful legality, which would be a costly burden to every future car buyer and a devastating blow for the European car industry."@en1
lpv:spokenAs	unknown; Conservative and Unionist Party (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 vice-chair; Delegations to the parliamentary cooperation committees and delegations for relations with Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Mongolia (1999-07-22--2002-01-14)3 member; Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 substitute; Committee on Development and Cooperation (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 member; EPP-ED (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata	"Bowis (PPE-DE )."1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph