Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-07-01-Speech-2-266"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2003-07-01"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Packaging and packaging waste2
dcterms:Language	"fi"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20030701.9.2-266"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2003-07-01-Speech-2-2672
lpv:speaker	lp:Riitta Myller2
lpv:spokenAs	substitute; EMPL (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3 unknown; Suomen Sosialidemokraattinen Puolue/Finlands Socialdemokratiska Parti (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 member; Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3 member; Delegation to the EU-Lithuania Joint Parliamentary Committee (2002-02-07--2004-04-30)3 vice-chair; PES (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, it is important to improve on the present Directive on packaging waste, as has been said here in several speeches. The targets for recycling and re-use for the next five years in the form now proposed are fairly high but are by no means unreasonable. Many Member States have already achieved considerably higher levels than those now being proposed. These suggested targets are easily achievable, and if we had less ambitious targets, then any branch of industry, for example, which would exploit the use of recycled material, could not develop. In order to reach the targets, however, we should bear in mind the excellent measures that have already been implemented in different Member States to achieve the greatest possible targets for recycling and re-use. For example, countries that have good experience of re-use projects should also be encouraged even further in this area. Just as the rapporteur stated, economic and ecological factors must be taken into consideration in this connection. I would therefore like to draw attention to the fact that, as recycling targets are being proposed for wood, it is these very ecological and economic factors that have not necessarily been taken into consideration. The 15% target for wood is a low one, but in a country like Finland, for example, the ecological disadvantages of transportation greatly outweigh the benefits gained from recycling wood in this way. It is a lot wiser ecologically if this wood is burnt as an energy source in people’s houses. I therefore hope that common sense will prevail and that Amendment No 26, which is a proposal put forward by the rapporteur and others, will be supported."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph