Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-03-12-Speech-2-159"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20020312.8.2-159"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, minimum health and safety standards are the core of European employee protection legislation. The harmful negative effects of noise exposure are scientifically documented and we do not need to discuss them in detail here. Noise-induced deafness is one of the most common occupational illnesses. Measures to protect workers from noise thus have a high priority. Everyone involved – workers, employers and legislators – should therefore seize every opportunity to keep noise pollution in the workplace as low as possible. With regard to reducing the noise levels which people voluntarily submit to during their leisure time, however, there is little we can do, other than appeal to the individual to exercise common sense.
In agreeing protective measures for the workplace, however, we must also take account of the scope for their practical implementation – and especially the impact on small and medium-sized businesses. There is little point in adopting highly complex rules at European level if they cannot or will not be complied with in practice. In striking a balance, I believe that the amendments proposed by this House generally offer acceptable solutions. I would also like to thank the rapporteur particularly for her willingness to compromise, which was already evident in the committee. This defused a potential conflict over a significant change to exposure limit values and action limit values, without sacrificing the justified interests of employees.
With regard to the assessment of the noise exposure level, too, the provisions of the Council's common position on individual hearing protection should be maintained. We also endorse Amendment No 8, which states that Member States may lay down values which are lower than the exposure limit values and the action limit values laid down in this directive where this is necessary with regard to the health and safety of workers. This is entirely in line with the principle of minimum standards in European social policy. We also make it clear that the employer is responsible for enforcing the wearing of hearing protectors
and the provision of individual training. As ‘prevention is better than cure’, a worker whose noise exposure exceeds the
exposure action values
will also be entitled to appropriate audiometric testing.
The use of a weekly noise exposure level in place of the daily noise exposure level under certain conditions is sensible, as envisaged in the Council's common position.
The aspect of this directive which triggered the most heated debate concerned the treatment of workers who are exposed to music, from classical/orchestral music to disco. In my view, we take adequate account of this special area in the compromise proposed in Amendment 23. I hope this is a solution which the Council can also endorse, for an immediate and unconditional inclusion of these events will hardly do justice to the general belief that music – whether in the concert hall or the night-club – is noise and should therefore be treated restrictively from the outset."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
"lower"1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples