Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-05-13-Speech-2-010"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20030513.2.2-010"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
". – Mr President, I wish to begin by welcoming our new colleagues from the new Member States. It is a real pleasure to see them in the European Parliament and I welcome them to the EU family.
Firstly, let me thank the rapporteur, Mr Manders, for his report concerning the Commission's proposal on environmental liability. Environmental liability is an important subject that has received well-deserved attention and caused intensive discussion for many years. The Commission has been working on this issue for a long time, in close contact with the parties concerned and civil society.
This process has re-emphasised the strategic importance of the underlying principles, whilst also pointing to a great diversity of opinions on the details of implementation. One is tempted to say that there are almost as many different views on the main issues as there are parties involved.
I am thus well aware that this proposal is a complex and sensitive one. Difficult choices had to be made on many of its aspects and the appropriate balance had to be found among competing interests. We believe that the Commission succeeded in reaching this balance when it adopted the proposal in January 2002. It is with the aim of maintaining, if not further improving, this balance that it will consider the amendments adopted by Parliament.
Let me briefly present to you the main features of the Commission's proposal. The proposal aims to establish a Community framework whereby environmental damage – which is defined in the proposal as biodiversity damage, water damage and land damage – would be prevented or remedied through a system of environmental liability. Whenever possible the operator who has caused the environmental damage – or provoked an imminent threat of such damage occurring – must, in accordance with the polluter pays principle, bear the costs associated with the implementation of the necessary preventive or restorative measures. In certain cases, in which no operator can be held liable or a liable operator is unable to pay, Member States must assume the responsibility for finding an alternative source of financing the measures in question.
There are several key issues that deserve special attention. These issues certainly invite more detailed comments, but today I will be as concise as possible. Firstly, the scope of the proposal in terms of the activities and biodiversity to be covered: in the Commission's view, strict liability should apply to the activities listed in Annex I to the proposal, and also to occupational activities other than those listed in Annex I, it being understood that this second tier of liability is fault-based. The Commission considers that suppressing this part of the liability regime is unacceptable since this would weaken the proposal. Conversely, the Commission does not believe it either justifiable or workable to expand strict liability to all occupational activities in the EU.
Having commented on the scope, let me just finish by saying that the debate on the amendments will be an extremely important one, during which I am sure we will hear some new arguments."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples