Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-09-02-Speech-1-061"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20020902.6.1-061"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Mr President, as we debate the revision of targets set in the 1994 packaging directive, in an effort to reduce the EU's growing mountain of packaging waste, I would like to thank our rapporteur, Mrs Corbey and the shadow rapporteur Mrs Ayuso González, for their hard work in this very important area.
There are two issues in this debate, the first is the targets and the second is the timetable.
While I agree with the emphasis on prevention targets and not only on the new recycling and reuse targets, I feel strongly that national authorities in each Member State should be free to optimise their own mix of recovery and recycling options. In relation to the timetable, I urge the Commission to carry out further studies to ensure that the targets applicable in the EU are also right for countries at the margin, not the least the new applicant states.
The consultants engaged to assist the Commission in setting the revised targets, RDC-Environment and Pira International, assumed a number of underlying principles which do not apply to some Member States, such as Greece, Portugal and Ireland. They fail to take specific geographical and demographic problems into account. For example, in Ireland 80% of our packaging is imported. Therefore there are limited indigenous outlets to use recycling packaging in the manufacture of new packaging. Hence my amendment, for which I urge support, for a 2011 timetable deadline for Greece, Portugal and Ireland.
I believe that the EU environment ministers appear to have already reached a 'common orientation' on this Directive in June 2002. They called for a deadline of 2012 for Portugal, Greece and Ireland. That is fine by me.
The real issue is that we should set realistically attainable targets and timetables and insist on the Irish, Greeks, Portuguese and others delivering on time, with no excuses.
I should like to end with a good news story, a dramatic example of a fiscal incentive to prevent, minimise, reuse and recycle and an example of how each Member State can determine its own mix of prevention, reuse and recycling to meet targets. On 4 March 2002, our environment minister introduced a plastic bag tax in Ireland, 15% per bag. It has had an incredible effect. We have had a 90% decrease in consumption in just a few months. One billion plastic bags have been taken out of circulation in six months. The Exchequer has collected EUR 3.5 million since March this year. The turnaround has been dramatic and there have been few complaints. There was a moan or two for a week when we would forget to bring the old shopping bags, but in changing the mindset this tax on its own has done what years of talking in this Parliament and national parliaments could not do.
I hope that the fact we have already done something to deal with the problem of these wretched plastic bags will not be held against us in relation to targets. Perhaps we were a year too early, because this would have allowed us to show a dramatic improvement in meeting all targets and timetables – I am being somewhat sarcastic but it is a serious point. The scheme has been a huge success and I would urge other countries to follow suit immediately to deal with this scourge. I understand the United Kingdom is looking at it. It will do more than all the talking and directives and transposition into national law."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples