Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-10-01-Speech-1-076"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20011001.5.1-076"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Noise policy is a very new thing in an industrialised society that moves ahead simply by means of a great deal of technology and a lot of noise, and, as for the question as to whether noise policy is a subsidiarity issue, one is in two minds when answering it. Mr Davies and Mr Blokland, if I were from your countries of origin, I too would adduce the argument from subsidiarity, but, my dear Mr Blokland, I know only two airports in the Netherlands whose flight paths, however, are located above my constituency. All this is relative, and so I believe that we here must talk about whether we can find an air corridor to serve as a model for the compilation of fundamental criteria, and I believe that our views on noise maps are by no means so divergent. I advocate comparable rules of measurement within the European Union as a matter of principle, and I also believe it to be self-evident that the action plans we arrive at on the basis of these measurements must be drawn up by the member countries, which must also implement and supervise them.
I take a great interest in the question, at what actual point such a regulatory mechanism takes effect, and here the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy has without any doubt gone too far. One could get the idea from reading the Committee on the Environment's text that, in future, every country lane will have to have its own noise map. The wording is doubtless much too vague, and what the Council proposes is quite simply boring. If you are only to draw up such a noise map when the figure of six million cars per annum is reached, then I suggest you abandon the whole operation. So, in my view, a good mean value would be a good solution.
As far as the measurement of noise from railway lines is concerned, it would have been good if we could have had another parameter for this, as noise from railways is perceived differently to that from motorways or airports. Unfortunately, that idea foundered at the committee stage, something which I particularly regret.
I wish to contradict Mrs Ria Oomen, whom I otherwise greatly respect, by saying that I think it almost courageous to state the belief that politicians like us, who concern ourselves with the environment, can decide in an environmental directive whether military pilots fly or not. Quite apart from the present situation, this Parliament does not have the right to regulate the times of practice flights by the French or the British. I believe that military aviation should have no place in this directive and nor will it find its way into it. In other respects, I believe this debate to have been basically necessary. I wish we could take this document to the Conciliation Committee; then, Mr de Roo, we would get away from your rather exaggerated demands and arrive at realistic ones that would get us somewhere in the overall scheme of things."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples