Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2007-10-22-Speech-1-112"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20071022.14.1-112"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, let me begin by expressing my thanks to the rapporteurs and shadow rapporteurs. It goes without saying that all of us care deeply about health and consumer protection, and the strength of feeling among the various Members of our House can be gauged from this highly charged debate.
It is nevertheless important that we really do decide on the basis of the facts and do not fly in the face of reality by creating scapegoats, as it were. It would be very easy, especially with this legislative package, to pick on a particular occupational group and look no further. That would be completely wrong. It must be established from the outset that all of us in Europe need a functioning agricultural sector, which necessarily entails the use of a certain quantity of plant protection agents.
On specific aspects of the Klaß report, let me say that it is indeed a sound principle to envisage certain reduction targets, but I believe the quantitative approach adopted here is simply too rigid. Every Member State should truly consider what it can do itself, because merely reducing the overall volume and believing this will clean up the environment is downright unscientific. As far as the buffer strips are concerned, there is nothing wrong with the Commission’s chosen strategy of treating subsidiarity as the key element. Every Member State should consider how it wants these buffer strips regulated. Blindly imposing a Community-wide ten-metre border would be wrong. Trying to find non-chemical alternatives in sensitive areas, such as habitats of rare flora and fauna, is also an approach that should be supported unreservedly.
As regards the Breyer report, it is important that we support the three-zone concept. Restricting the scope of licences to single Member States would be an excessively narrow approach. Special care is needed with regard to the exclusion criteria. An unequivocal ban for CMR1-rated substances may be taken as read, but in the case of CMR2 substances I am also in favour of taking scientific data as a basis for licensing decisions."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples