Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-11-17-Speech-4-077"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20051117.14.4-077"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Our duty in this, as in all, discussions is to protect the interests of the citizens, whether they be immediate interests, or interests which are not yet apparent but which will take on vital importance in the medium and long term.
I personally voted on the basis of criteria that I consider crucial when there is conflict – at least apparent conflict – between the interests of industry and the interests of protecting the environment and public health.
First and foremost, I feel that protecting public health and the environment should be a priority, but I do not believe in fundamentalist solutions that take a broad brush to everything, overlooking the economic impact of measures and, more importantly, failing to take account of the global dimension of these issues when it comes to economies that have no compunction about environmental dumping. I am also convinced that our strict requirements benefit European industry itself, and act in the interests of competitiveness and technological innovation. Lastly, I believe that there is an urgent need to relaunch the European economy and that we must pull out all the stops to ensure that this happens. In light of the amendments introduced, I opted to vote in favour, not least because there will be further opportunities to introduce any necessary corrections, as in the section on authorisation."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples