Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-12-12-Speech-2-411"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2006-12-12"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Type approval of motor vehicles with respect to emissions and access to vehicle repair information (debate)2
dcterms:Language	"de"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20061212.47.2-411"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2006-12-12-Speech-2-4122
lpv:speaker	lp:Rebecca Harms2
lpv:spokenAs	unknown; Bündnis 90/Die Grünen (2004-07-20--2009-07-13)3 substitute; ENVI (2004-07-21--2007-01-14)3 member; G/EFA (2004-07-20--2007-02-26)3 member; Delegation to the EU-Ukraine Parliamentary Cooperation Committee (2004-09-15--2009-07-13)3 substitute; Delegation to the EU-Russia Parliamentary Cooperation Committee (2004-09-15--2009-07-13)3 member; ITRE (2004-07-21--2007-01-14)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, I must say that we shadow rapporteurs also had a great deal of fun with our rapporteur Mr Groote. Sometimes we agreed, sometimes we did not agree, however, at the end of the compromise I ask myself if the central responsibility for the negotiations really was in the hands of the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety. When I now look at the entire package, I get the impression that such a proposal normally tends to be put together by the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy. I would like to briefly explain my position, which is different from Mr Krahmer’s portrayal of ‘the green side of this House’. I can see that this Parliament obviously does not seem to be capable of consistently championing incentives for technological innovations which could have positive effects on the environment. The type of particle filters which we now require for Euro 5 – some time from the autumn of 2009 onwards - are already available today. I do not understand why we have now included an artificial political delay in the process. Technologies to reduce nitrogen oxides are also already available today. It is completely incomprehensible to me that these will be made mandatory only from 2014 and 2015 onwards. In my view, this politically motivated hesitation about technological innovation cannot be justified. Another important question for me is this: why is it not possible to lay down today tax incentives for ambitious nitrogen oxide reducing technologies? The lack of ambition in this Euro 5 and Euro 6 Regulation culminates symbolically in this remarkably generous derogation for heavy SUVs. I do not see why we should make a long term exception – lasting well into the next decade – precisely for such dirty, environmentally hazardous vehicles. My view is that in doing so, we are only sending out an indefensible, irrational political signal."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph