Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2012-04-19-Speech-4-375-812"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20120419.15.4-375-812"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"On the one hand, taxing energy products used on the dual basis of CO
emissions and energy content and, on the other, the observance by Member States of the principle of proportionality between the various minima set at EU level, would result in a substantial increase in the price of diesel in the vast majority of Member States. I therefore supported the opinion of the rapporteur, who rejected this proportionality because of its destabilising effect. Perhaps the worst result would be inflation, because the increase in diesel prices would translate into an increase in retail prices. I would like to clarify in this context that I do not reject the Commission’s efforts to eliminate the price advantage of diesel fuel. Such a neutral treatment of all fuels would provide a technologically neutral advantage to all CO
free fuels and would also encourage energy efficiency. However, I do not agree with the raising of the minimum tax rate using the method by which the Commission intends to achieve this status. Neutral taxation of fuels could also be achieved by reducing the minimum tax rate on petrol. Sadly, this solution did not occur to the Commission, the Member States, or my colleagues in this Parliament. The outcome of today’s vote also means that the one-sided cost advantage for manufacturers and users of diesel engines, which is increasingly difficult to defend, is maintained. I consider this to be unfair."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples