Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-10-24-Speech-1-134"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20051024.18.1-134"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, I should like to thank the European Parliament, the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety and, in particular, the rapporteur, Mr Blokland, for the work which they have done on the present report at second reading.
The changes which the Council's common position proposes would create serious obstacles to the internal recycling market and are not acceptable to the Commission.
Amendment 35 might prevent possible problems on the internal market. It makes provision for maximum deadlines for formulating objections to shipments of waste for recovery on the basis of national standards. Such objections can only be raised up to the day on which specific Community legislation enters into force and no later than four years after the present regulation enters into force. If the proposed amendment is approved, it will address the concerns expressed by the Commission about the recycling market.
One of the main objectives of the proposed new regulation on shipments of waste is to ensure that the European Union aligns with international requirements for shipments of waste, both at OECD and United Nations level, in other words with the Basel Convention.
The other main objective is to address the problems which arise during the application and administrative management of and the imposition of compliance with the existing regulation. Consequently, the new regulation also seeks to contribute to greater clarity and better lawmaking on shipments of waste.
The relevant discussions in the Council were held during the Italian and Irish Presidencies. At first reading, the Commission amended the proposal and approved 43 of the 103 amendments proposed by the European Parliament in full, in part or in principle. The Council's common position incorporated 41 of the amendments of the European Parliament. The common position is an important step forwards, as far as improving the clarity of the regulation and its provisions is concerned, in keeping always with the objectives set.
I should like to point out that our aim is to close this particular dossier as quickly as possible. We need this new regulation in order to improve the clarity and application of the rules governing shipments of waste and in order to achieve compliance with the European Union's international commitments.
However, the Commission did not accept the common position as regards three specific issues, which it reasoned in a statement through an announcement to the European Parliament on 1 July 2005. These issues are the legal basis for the regulation, the objections of the Member States on shipments of waste intended for recovery and a provision on the exemption of animal by-products from the scope of the regulation.
The Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety voted in favour of 90 amendments to the common position. The Commission considers that 74 of these are acceptable in full or in principle, but is unable to accept 16 of the amendments.
Maintaining the internal market is a question of fundamental importance to the Commission. Today, waste for recovery is moved freely between the Member States, provided that it adheres to strict environmental protection rules and the principle of proportionality.
A robust European recycling market helps to reduce the environmental impact caused by the use of natural resources. The free movement of waste for recovery has already been established in the existing regulation on shipments of waste, the provisions of the Treaty of the European Communities on the free movement of goods and the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Communities."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples