Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-04-10-Speech-3-218"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20020410.7.3-218"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Mr President, it should be noted that the Commission has been unable to suggest a maximum limit value on the exposure to chrysotile, mainly because it has been impossible to prove that any deaths have arisen from the use of products containing white asbestos. Yet this committee knows better. It thinks that the precautionary principle should apply. The only way to protect workers is a policy of zero risk.
To demonstrate the absurdity of this stance, you should note that a human being on average breathes in 20,000 white asbestos fibres a day; up to 2 million exist in the lungs of healthy individuals, and they are all from natural sources. In fact, although occupational exposure to massive levels of white asbestos may pose some risk, as indeed does exposure to any dust at high levels, even the UK's own risk-averse Health and Safety Executive concedes that there is a negligible risk from exposure to products made from white asbestos. Yet the inclusion of white asbestos in this directive is estimated by none other than our own Trade Union Council to cost GBP 80 billion for the UK alone and up to GBP 500 billion throughout Europe, without possibly saving a single life. At the very least, therefore, this Parliament should pause for thought and refer this legislation back to a committee for a full evaluation of its costs and consequences."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples