Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2004-03-30-Speech-2-280"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2004-03-30"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Århus Convention2
dcterms:Language	"fr"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20040330.11.2-280"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2004-03-30-Speech-2-2812
lpv:speaker	lp:Françoise Grossetête2
lpv:spokenAs	substitute; BUDG (2002-08-29--2004-07-19)3,3 member; Temporary committee on improving safety at sea (2003-11-20--2004-04-21)3,3 vice-chair; EPP-ED (2002-03-08--2004-07-19)3,3 member; Delegation to the EU-Cyprus Joint Parliamentary Committee (2002-03-07--2004-04-30)3,3 unknown; Union pour un Mouvement Populaire (2002-11-18--2004-07-19)3,3 member; Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3,3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, we are faced with two related proposals which must both fit in with the philosophy of the Århus Convention and only with that philosophy. The question of whether or not to comply with the provisions of the Århus Convention is not on the agenda. What we have to look at is how to act so that our governments and the Community institutions can implement this agreement. The Århus Convention is undoubtedly a real advance, as it plays a part in establishing what has become essential transparency, and we are called upon here to present methods of providing the public with access to justice. If this Convention is to be effective, however, it must bear the stamp of modernity and set in motion greater participation among all those who contribute to improving the environment in Europe. That is why we should include a precise reference to the concept of sustainable development. It would be inconsistent to try to make do with an overly restrictive definition of environmental law, and thus to exclude whole sectors of activity that, nevertheless, play an active part in achieving our environmental objectives. I am thinking in particular here of professional groups. With regard, more particularly, to the proposal for a directive, insofar as the Århus Convention will be implemented, the first question is whether the directive is really necessary. This is a valid question and, if there is a directive, it must correspond to the spirit of the Convention. In this case, it must also respect the principle of subsidiarity: this, I may add, is also the basis of our amendments. This is because it is the Member States which will have to implement the requirements of the Århus Convention, and this must occur in accordance with the law in force in each of our countries and with the legal traditions applicable there. I would under no circumstances support amendments aiming to impose one Member State's legal practices on all the others. On the other hand, we must anticipate possible cross-border cases, and we must specify the conceivable procedures for appeals. If these points are not taken on board, then, for reasons of legal consistency, we will probably choose to do without this directive."@en1
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata	"de facto"1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph