Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2009-05-07-Speech-4-035"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20090507.7.4-035"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, as has already been said, in 1999 the European Union adopted a directive banning asbestos from 1 January 2005, but permitting a derogation for diaphragms used for existing electrolysis cells until they reached the end of their service life.
This derogation, which had to be re-examined before 1 January, was intended to enable the companies concerned to make plans to stop using asbestos. Here we are today, with an 18-month delay; it is therefore time that we made progress. It is true that, as part of the review of Annex XVII to REACH, the Commission is proposing to extend the current ban on the use and marketing of asbestos fibres and products containing these fibres, but it is maintaining the option for asbestos to be used in factory-based electrolysis installations, with no time limit imposed, even though asbestos-free alternatives do exist and are used by many companies.
Moreover, the Commission is adopting a provision that permits the placing on the market of articles containing asbestos in accordance with a system that could vary from one country to another. This is unacceptable, since the use of this product is responsible for a large number of illnesses linked to exposure to asbestos fibres. Furthermore, the number of people succumbing to these illnesses is likely to continue to rise over the next few years, as this product was still being used up until a few years ago. The effects of asbestos on health have long been known.
I would add that the Commission’s decision undermines certain REACH provisions, not least the principle of substitution; it is a bad signal that has been sent out to the other companies. The current economic crisis cannot justify this extension.
Furthermore, this position of the Commission’s, which has the backing of a majority of Member States at the Council, is inconsistent with the European Union’s position, which aims to introduce a worldwide ban on asbestos.
I have one last point before I finish: the European Trade Union Confederation is today maintaining that it was not consulted on the matter and is suggesting that only the opinion of certain companies was heard and taken on board. The Commission, for its part, is claiming the opposite. Could you shed some light on this point for us?"@en1
|
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples