Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2004-03-30-Speech-2-293"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20040330.12.2-293"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, may I begin by thanking everyone who has contributed constructively to the creation of this compromise and the directive, which I hope, and I am almost sure, will be accepted. I would in particular like to thank the Vice President, Mr Imbeni, who headed the conciliation delegation, Mr Gargani, chairman of the Committee on Legal Affairs and the Internal Market, and all shadow rapporteurs, who contributed constructively to the creation of the compromise, as well as Ambassador Gunning who attended the conciliation on behalf of the Council. I would also particularly like to thank Ana Palacio, who has since left this Parliament. At the time Mrs Palacio was chairman of the Committee on Legal Affairs and the Internal Market, and was responsible for a unique moment in this Parliament, namely for what I call the ‘Manders procedure’. The ‘Manders procedure’ meant that the whole of this Parliament ultimately had to vote on which committee was authorised to draft and deal with this report. I found that a particular honour, and I think that it has led to an acceptable result.
Why are we satisfied with the compromise reached? Because, after decades of debate, we have for the first time found a legal title that will enable us to ensure that the costs of repairing environmental damage can be recovered from the polluter. The liberal principle that the polluter pays is the main theme in this respect. As a liberal, I am, of course, particularly happy with this. This is new, it is the cornerstone, a bridge that connects economic and environmental legislation. I am, however, not entirely satisfied, although as I said at my press conference after the compromise with the Council had been reached, we will have to regard this as a seed that has now been sown, and we hope that it will grow into fully fledged legislation.
What is happening? In my view, because of the extent to which this directive 'allows', there is still a very good chance that we will create a kind of patchwork quilt in Europe and that the Member States, particularly in more economically difficult times, will find the economy more important than environmental protection. I therefore regret that my ultimate proposal to apply Article 95, maximum harmonisation, has not been adopted and that we have taken Article 195 as the basis. The environmental organisations, the environmental NGOs, played a particular role in this. They are not complaining that there will be too little harmonisation, and during the procedure they did not support maximum harmonisation, something which I deeply regret. On the other hand, Europe was obviously not ready for that. This is also evident from the conciliation procedure, because only four amendments to the Community point of view were adopted in Parliament. Only four! For this we had to convene three more conciliation meetings.
Ultimately, I believe that the compromise can be described as successful. This was also evident in the outcome of the vote in the conciliation delegation from Parliament, because 12 to 1 in favour of the result achieved is of course fantastic. I hope that this is the beginning. I also hope that the Member States will not abuse their licence policy and the state of science in order to upset the level playing field for economic activities, which we are after all so keen to create in the internal market, by some Member States allowing more than others and doing nothing to benefit the environment. On the other hand, certain benefits have already been achieved. For example, the maximum liability amount in the IMO Convention has been increased from 50 million to 1 billion. The preventative effect of the directive has thus already proven its worth. I hope that Euratom will follow very soon, and I think that this will ultimately result in excellent legislation.
Once again, we have made a start, and I hope that this will result in something good. I would like to wholeheartedly thank the Commissioner. It was of course one of her top priorities, and she can now conclude this theme as part of this mandate. I would therefore like to wholeheartedly thank her, her staff and, in particular, Charles Pirotti, who is also present today, for their constructive contribution to this matter. I would like to invite the Commissioner to lunch or dinner, as her busy schedule has prevented us from giving a joint press conference. Perhaps this is a good idea, because by way of this invitation I would very much like to explain my thoughts on how I would like to see this directive grow into fully fledged legislation in the future, and in particular my thoughts on my EMAS (Environmental Management Assessment). I would very much like to speak to her about this and I therefore hope that she will take me up on my invitation.
Perhaps there will be time for a quick beer after this debate. Thanks again to everyone, and I hope that a full majority will accept this proposal tomorrow. Thank you most kindly, Mr President, and thanks to everyone concerned for their constructive contribution."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples