Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-05-02-Speech-3-152"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2001-05-02"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Nuclear safety fifteen years after Chernobyl2
dcterms:Language	"el"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20010502.10.3-152"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2001-05-02-Speech-3-1532
lpv:speaker	lp:Antonios Trakatellis2
lpv:spokenAs	substitute; Committee on Industry, External Trade, Research and Energy (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 member_of_the_bureau; EPP-ED (2000-04-10--2004-07-19)3 substitute; Delegation to the EU-Cyprus Joint Parliamentary Committee (1999-10-08--2002-01-14)3 member; Delegation for relations with Israel (1999-10-06--2002-01-14)3 vice-chair; Temporary committee on human genetics and other new technologies in modern medicine (2001-01-16--2001-11-29)3 unknown; Nea Dimokratia (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 member; Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, Commissioner, it is fifteen years since the epic disaster at Chernobyl but the consequences are still being measured today. Victims, human lives are being lost to cancer. And this disaster did not just affect the neighbouring countries, Ukraine and Belarus, it affected countries thousands of miles away, including my own. The question is, and I agree with previous speakers here: have we learnt our lesson from this accident, have we finally understood that human error is always there, lying in ambush waiting to strike? Where human error combines with a nuclear reactor which is unsafe and does not meet proper safety standards, as in the present case, then of course the dangers are immense. I say this, Commissioner, because similar reactors are still operating in Europe. They are operating in Russia, they are operating in Lithuania, they are operating in Slovakia and four reactors are operating in our neck of the woods, close to Greece, in Kozlodoui. I, for one, disagree with the Commission’s timetable for shutting down these reactors which, as the Commission itself says, cannot be upgraded at reasonable expense to the safety standards which a nuclear reactor should meet. For example, what has been said about Kozlodoui? That two reactors should be shut down in 2002, while we have yet to agree that the other two should be shut down in 2006. Surely this is a very long time to leave dangerous reactors in operation. And why? Because there are financial considerations. Well, let us deal with the financial considerations. Financial considerations cannot take precedence over the environment and human health in general and the health of European citizens in particular. Consequently, I say to you, as you are here, that you should be forceful, not only because some of the candidate countries do not want to keep to these dates, but also because various arguments as to how their service life can be extended are already being bandied about. For example, I read in the papers two days ago that the official press in Kozlodoui said that it could stay in operation until 2010. The reactors may even be sold to private individuals. For the love of God, how can they say such things? I therefore think that, fifteen years after Chernobyl and with what we have to do so that Chernobyl is safe and sound under its sarcophagus, we need to be sure, over and above these efforts, that we intend to put an end to these dangerous reactors in Bulgaria, Slovakia, Lithuania and Russia. I think that, if money needs to be spent, Commissioner, we should spend it. The financial problem is secondary. The most important considerations are the environment and health, the public health of the citizens of Europe."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph