Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2010-09-21-Speech-2-739"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2010-09-21"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Inclusion of aviation activities in the scheme for greenhouse gas emission allowance trading within the Community (debate)2
dcterms:Language	"de"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20100921.24.2-739"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2010-09-21-Speech-2-7402
lpv:speaker	lp:Peter Liese2
lpv:spokenAs	substitute; Delegation to the EU-Chile Joint Parliamentary Committee (2009-09-16--2014-06-30)3 member; ENVI (2009-07-16--2012-01-18)3 unknown; Christlich Demokratische Union Deutschlands (2009-07-14--2014-06-30)3 member_of_the_bureau; EPP (2009-07-24--2014-06-30)3 substitute; AFET (2009-07-16--2012-01-18)3 member; Delegation to the Euro-Latin American Parliamentary Assembly (2009-09-16--2014-06-30)3 member; Delegation for relations with the countries of Central America (2009-09-16--2014-06-30)3
lpv:translated text	"Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, in 2008 – following intense negotiations – we resolved to include aviation in the emissions trading system. I was the rapporteur at the time, and some of the shadow rapporteurs are also present here. We did not do it to annoy the aviation industry or third countries; we did it because we have a major problem. There has been a dramatic rise in greenhouse gases, and emissions of greenhouse gases from aviation have doubled since 1990. In 1997, the global community delegated the task of reducing these greenhouse gases to ICAO in the Kyoto Protocol. I regret to say that ICAO has produced no concrete results to date. We felt that it was important when drafting legislation to include all airlines that take off or land in Europe. Whether they are European airlines, US airlines or Chinese airlines makes no difference; all must be included. That is important for the climate, and naturally it is also important from the point of view of fair competition. All this was approved in the codecision and Parliament made great compromises compared with its original proposals. It is therefore important to communicate this to third countries. The compromises cannot be easily changed because they were agreed in the codecision procedure. Naturally there was already resistance at that time from third countries and this is now being articulated in the run-up to the ICAO General Assembly, which commences next week. I believe that legally, we are very much on the safe side; as rapporteur, I repeatedly took great care to ensure that the legal basis was correct. Like everything, however, it is also a political issue. We therefore need political support for our lead negotiators at ICAO, for Commissioner Kallas and for the Belgian Presidency. I think the position of the US is particularly precarious. Last week, I met the US lead negotiator and asked her whether she was actually aware that the climate legislation approved by the House of Representatives and for which President Obama is constantly declaring his support will also be affected if the US succeeds in getting ICAO to allow a system based on mutual recognition. That would make the Waxman-Markey Bill illegal. The Americans had no answer to that, so that may be the way we can stop them in their tracks. President Obama should not just talk about protecting the climate; he should actually do something."@en1
lpv:videoURI	<go to Events_and_structure europarl>2

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph