Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2008-06-17-Speech-2-216"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20080617.35.2-216"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"The compromise proposal of the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission on waste management is a significant
for the sake of the huge, hidden financial interests involved in refuse and waste.
The proposed directive does not contribute to an overall reduction in the volume of waste. Its targets and means are deliberately vague. It exempts industrial waste and confines itself to certain types of urban waste, in the interests of cost-effectiveness and competition rather than the environment and public health.
One example of the general climb-down is the undermining of the hierarchical structure whereby recycling must precede energy recovery. Another example is viewing energy combustion of composite waste as energy recovery in cases other than those already specified, such as the production of biogas.
Toxic and other hazardous substances discharged into the air, penetrating the soil and the water table, and affecting nutrients, have a direct effect on the health of employees in the waste management sector, and the population as a whole.
What is needed is a reduction in the volume of refuse, as well as its planned management and properly organised transport. Responsibility should be taken at government, regional and local level to sort and separate toxic and other hazardous substances (dioxins etc.) and there should be as much recycling as possible. Composite waste must not be burnt. There ought to be an environmental upgrade of landfill sites and safe final disposal of the residues from them."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples