Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-07-05-Speech-3-358"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2000-07-05"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:EMAS (Eco-Management and Audit Scheme)2
dcterms:Language	"fr"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20000705.10.3-358"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2000-07-05-Speech-3-3592
lpv:speaker	lp:Frédérique Ries2
lpv:spokenAs	member; ELDR (1999-07-20--2003-06-11)3 member; Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 unknown; Parti réformateur libéral/Front démocratique des francophones (1999-07-20--2004-02-11)3 member; Delegation for relations with Israel (1999-09-29--2002-01-14)3 substitute; Committee on Culture, Youth, Education, the Media and Sport (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, Commissioner, the intention behind EMAS is an excellent one: encouraging companies to have more respect for the environment. Seven years after its creation, however, EMAS is a success only in some countries. There is still a long way to go, and today we need to identify the reason for this limited result. EMAS is complex, too complex. The regulation imposes heavy constraints on those companies which do agree, voluntarily, to participate. This complexity is such as to discourage SMEs, which, as we all know, are bending under the weight of bureaucracy. Yet they are the engine of Europe’s economy. We should be making them our number one priority, hence the importance of the incentives our rapporteur was just talking about. In the same spirit, I would also say that some amendments are in danger of erring through excess of ambition. I mean Amendments Nos 5, 10 and 17 on the best available technologies, the BATs. A requirement like that would mean sometimes insoluble problems for SMEs, which cannot always adapt to these BATs. In any case their very definition is already a problem for some economic sectors. So the Group of the European Liberal, Democrat and Reform Party will be voting against. On the other hand, in the spirit of compromise, we are ready to support Amendments Nos 43, 44 and 45, which link these best available technologies, from the environmental viewpoint, with conditions that are economically and technically viable for businesses. Finally, there is the question of workers’ participation, which we naturally value highly and which the common position entirely authorises. On the other hand, we reject Amendments Nos 41 and 50, because more restrictive measures here again threaten to discourage a large number of candidate firms. Finally, I will simply say that quantity must not drive out quality. The system is voluntary, so it must be attractive in order to survive. Otherwise EMAS will be no more than a litany of good intentions likely to be impracticable for businesses and therefore completely useless."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph