Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-02-05-Speech-2-298"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20020205.14.2-298"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Madam President, I also wish to welcome the Commissioner at this late hour. I cannot help but wonder if it is always the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy that meets on Tuesday night during the part-session in Strasbourg or whether we are regarded as some kind of suspect fundamentalist sect that is always placed lowest down on the agenda. That would be pretty odd, given that we are responsible for one of the most important issues in Parliament, namely that of the environment. I should like to ask both the President and the Commissioner to look into whether it would be possible to change this, that is to say whether it would be possible at least sometimes to raise the status of environmental issues by debating them in the daytime and not always after nightfall.
I had really intended to begin by parodying a well-known Conservative politician in Sweden who once said that he was not only a Hallander but also a European. I should like to say, today, that I am not only a proud Gothenburger but also a proud European. I am proud to be able to say that Parliament has now concluded its debate on the Kyoto Protocol, and I look forward to the Council’s also being able to ratify it in March.
I am particularly proud, however, of having been able to participate in the little delegation that visited the United States last week. We were given the opportunity of discussing the climate issue with both Congress and the House of Representatives. I have the sense that there is not only a physical ocean separating the continents but also a mental ocean, given the way in which the United States regards the climate issue and believes it should be handled. Certainly, the climate issue has now been recognised as a problem in the United States because their own researchers have stated that it
a problem. However, it is still believed that the solution to this problem is to be found in the United States. It is this view that most divides us. The United States regards a global environmental threat as a domestic problem that only concerns Americans, while the European attitude is that the issue should be dealt with jointly.
I therefore wish to thank the Commissioner for having taken such an active role and also thank the rapporteur of the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy, Mr Moreira Da Silva, who has kept us together and ensured that we have held a common view and position beyond the frontiers of Europe.
We need, in the future, to stick together not only in theory but also in practice. That cohesion will be put to the test following ratification, as it will also be when, a little later on in the spring, we debate the European Climate Change Programme and emissions trading. It is just unfortunate that certain members of the Council will feel the need to make a fuss about the way in which the burden is distributed. It is pretty pathetic that it is Members from a Scandinavian country who will be doing this. However, there are black sheep everywhere. Whatever the case, I am pleased that we are able to conclude the debate on the Kyoto Protocol today."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
"is"1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples