Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2007-05-21-Speech-1-130"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20070521.18.1-130"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, we have here an extremely important daughter directive of the water framework directive.
I would remind you that this framework directive provides for the restoration of the good ecological status of surface and fresh waters in the European Union by 2015, and I must tell you, Commissioner, that its very slow implementation worries us greatly. The fact remains that it was crucially important to provide a framework for the ban on priority substances and priority hazardous substances, some of which must disappear, and to enact standards relating thereto.
Originally, the framework directive provided for complete consistency with the international conventions on seas, not least the OSPAR Convention. This convention contains a list of substances that are destined gradually to disappear, and my group felt that it was vital systematically to integrate into the list of priority hazardous substances in the directive those that appear in the OSPAR Convention. However, for the sake of compromise, the Socialist Group in the European Parliament accepted the proposal made by our rapporteur, Mrs Laperrouze – to whom I should like to pay tribute for her sterling work and personal commitment – and withdrew its amendment. In any case, the PSE will ensure that, once the work of the experts and the impact studies are complete, the Commission actually sets to work on achieving the highest level of protection because, as you know, what is at stake is not only the quality of our waters, but also the quality of our seas and oceans and consistency with the ‘Marine strategy’ draft directive, which we examined at first reading.
As for the rest, we fully endorse the proposals that have been supported by the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety, which I shall summarise as follows. Firstly, that there be identical measuring methods throughout the European Union, which, I might add, will be easier for the Member States and clearer for Europeans. Secondly, that there be transitional areas, of course, but with a cut-off date that was set, or in any case proposed, at first reading as 2008, if I remember rightly. Thirdly and finally, the very important point that we gradually ensure that our legislative proposals are fully consistent, so often criticised are we for accumulating different ideas, and the final arbitration must be made clear to Europeans."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples