Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-03-14-Speech-2-101"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2000-03-14"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Vote2
dcterms:Language	"fr"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20000314.7.2-101"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2000-03-14-Speech-2-1022
lpv:speaker	lp:Dominique F.C. Souchet2
lpv:spokenAs	member; AGRI (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 unknown; Rassemblement pour la France (1999-07-20--2000-11-22)3 substitute; EMPL (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 member; UEN (1999-07-20--2001-01-30)3 substitute; PECH (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 member; Members from the European Parliament to the Joint Parliamentary Assembly of the Agreement between the African, Caribbean and Pacific States and the European Union (ACP-EU) (1999-09-14--2002-01-14)3
lpv:translated text	"The Council must already have debated at length on the subject of this directive on port facilities for disposing of vessels’ operational waste, but its final text respected the principles of stepping up the protection of the marine environment while taking account of the real situation in each of the Member States, without disrupting national practices, and this is not true of the text of the report which has just been presented to us. A State such as France has already in fact implemented the terms of the Marpol Convention by guaranteeing that each port has top quality waste disposal and processing facilities, operated by private companies, which invoice the shipowner directly according to the type and nature of the waste. Reducing the costs for use by vessels deemed to be ‘ecological’ is therefore only natural. This solution, which benefits the more environmentally friendly vessels, would seem to be much fairer than an arbitrary reduction in favour of the vessels labelled as ‘ecological’, (and what would be the criteria for this?) or a standard contribution for the use of the facilities applied indiscriminately: we therefore refuse to replace a charging system based on the nature of the waste with a blind charging policy based on the volume of vessels, regardless of their level of risk to the environment. It must also be said that ‘clearing ballast’ at sea is unfortunately to a very great extent exempt from the charging system. Only inspections at sea and more frequent inspections of vessels docking in ports would be likely to reduce the amount of dumping at sea. For all these reasons the UEN Group, recalling its agreement with the Council’s common position, is now opposing the text of this report which has twisted the principles of the common position. The report urges Member States most strongly to face up to their responsibilities in full by implementing as soon as possible the inspection measures which, backed up by a system of penalties along the ‘polluter pays/polluter cleans’ principle, would perhaps make it possible to prevent the recurrence of disasters such as the one which, recently, so scandalously disfigured the French coastline."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph