Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-02-13-Speech-1-191"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2006-02-13"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Exposure of workers to optical radiation (debate)2
dcterms:Language	"de"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20060213.16.1-191"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2006-02-13-Speech-1-1922
lpv:speaker	lp:Anja Weisgerber2
lpv:spokenAs	member; Delegation to the Euro-Mediterranean Parliamentary Assembly (2004-09-15--2009-07-13)3 substitute; EMPL (2004-07-22--2007-01-14)3 unknown; Christlich-Soziale Union in Bayern e.V. (2004-07-20--2009-07-13)3 member; EPP-ED (2004-07-20--2009-07-13)3 substitute; Delegation to the EU-Chile Joint Parliamentary Committee (2004-09-15--2009-07-13)3 member; ENVI (2004-07-21--2007-01-14)3 substitute; IMCO (2006-01-19--2007-01-14)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, the Commission’s proposal for a directive to protect workers against optical radiation was, as regards what it had to say about protection from sunlight, a masterpiece of European over-regulation. At second reading, and by an absolute majority, we in this House nailed our colours to the mast by voting to remove the provisions on protection from natural radiation. In the conciliation process, too, we showed that we MEPs are able to get our own way, rather than being powerless and at the mercy of the Commission’s mania for lawmaking. We are empowered to draft the sort of directives that will be of benefit to the public. Verheugen and others are always talking about the better lawmaking that will bring about more growth and jobs in the EU, but it is regulations like these that need to be improved first. It is a matter of considerable surprise that we have now been able, in the conciliation procedure, to persuade the Commission and Council of this. The parts of this directive that make sense – the ones dealing with the protection of workers from artificial optical radiation, such as lasers, infra-red light and the like – remain unchanged. As regards the regulations on natural radiation, it has to be said that the Commission missed the mark by a long way, for the original proposal for a directive required employers to commission comprehensive assessments of the risks associated with sunlight and bureaucratic action plans to deal with them, which would have involved employers having to provide t-shirts and suncream for workers working outdoors. It would also have entailed liabilities of which employers would have been unaware, and, in any case, any sane person is the best judge of when and how they should protect themselves against the sun. It is all about personal responsibility and is pretty much the last thing that Europe should be laying down the law about. Europe has quite different problems to deal with, in the shape of unemployment, exhausted social security systems and more and more aged people among the population. Those are the things we need to worry about, not protection from sunlight. Even the Commission and the Council have come to their senses and recognised this in the course of the conciliation procedure, and I am very glad that they have. It has made possible a considerable improvement in the directive and prevented over-regulation that would have resulted in needless additional expense, particularly for small and medium-sized enterprises. I urge you to vote, tomorrow, in favour of the Conciliation Committee’s proposal, and then we will flag up our desire for less bureaucracy and less red tape throughout Europe."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph