Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-03-12-Speech-1-088"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2001-03-12"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Safe transport of radioactive material2
dcterms:Language	"fi"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20010312.6.1-088"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2001-03-12-Speech-1-0892
lpv:speaker	lp:Ari Vatanen2
lpv:spokenAs	unknown; Kansallinen Kokoomus (Finland) (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 member; Committee on Regional Policy, Transport and Tourism (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 member; EPP-ED (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 substitute; AGRI (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 member; Delegations to the parliamentary cooperation committees and delegations for relations with Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Mongolia (1999-11-11--2002-01-14)3 member; Delegation to the EU-Hungary Joint Parliamentary Committee (1999-10-06--2002-01-14)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, we should not actually have been discussing nuclear safety, but the sworn opponents of nuclear power have changed the report’s course. The Group of the Greens do not want to understand the undeniable environmental advantages of nuclear power. What a paradox! It is obvious, too, that the Group of the Greens’ position on nuclear power is based on the ideology of 1968, and they still refuse to engage in frank and honest discussion on the topic. Their opinions seem to be fixed beforehand, and the facts have no effect on them. The first version of the report was used as a chance for them to get on their hobbyhorse and oppose nuclear energy. What is remarkable is that there was no mention, whatsoever, in the report of the Commission’s action programme, which contains many sensible initiatives. Fortunately, after the amendments tabled in the committee, we have managed to return from a myopic position to one that goes to the core of the matter. The transport of radioactive material is in compliance with the regulations of the International Atomic Energy Agency. The Commission has consulted a working party made up of experts – not politicians, note – from Member States. The working party considers that the modified regulations will give a considerable amount of additional protection, although the original ones were not regarded as in any way inadequate. The risks are considered to be small and, thanks to the stringent regulations in force, accidents have been avoided for almost half a century. This is so despite the fact that certain, though by no means all, opponents of nuclear power try, irresponsibly, to sabotage the transport operation, for example, by loosening rails. This makes one wonder who is responsible and who is putting public safety at risk. I urge everyone to keep to the facts. The Commission’s remark that the public ought to be told how good the situation is in the final analysis, is, therefore, more than justified. Because nuclear power increases prosperity and makes for a cleaner environment, it is an inevitable solution to the energy question. If the nuclear power plants in France were closed down right now, there would be a rush in this Chamber to look for candles."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph