Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-04-10-Speech-4-024"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20030410.1.4-024"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Madam President, when we came in this morning there was a distinct smell of cigars in this Chamber. For a moment I thought that this was some new ingredient that was being demonstrated in the detergents which had been used to clean the Chamber overnight. I suspect it is more to do with compliance with the parliamentary clean air directive, as opposed to the parliamentary hot air directive which very often informs our debates.
However, it is detergents we are discussing this morning and we should remember, as Mr Florenz reminded us, what that industry is made up of: in particular, in the specialist area – the non-domestic area – some two-thirds of that area is produced by small firms employing some 20 000 people throughout the European Union. That is why everyone is right to congratulate Mr Nobilia, our rapporteur, on the skilful way in which he has struck a balance between environmental concerns, consumer choice and information and the industry's interests, so as to come up with a proposal that we can unite behind here today.
I congratulate him on the skill with which he has negotiated the eight compromise amendments that were passed in committee. These address a number of areas, including the complementary risk-assessments for surfactants that fail the ultimate biodegradability tests, so that a tiered approach can take into account exposure and risk. He was also right to tighten the Commission's wording regarding access to detailed ingredient lists for medical staff, ensuring not only access for medical professionals, but also confidentiality of data. He was right to bolster consumer access to information, ensuring that full lists of substances added to detergents are readily accessible to consumers.
Then we had the compromise on phosphates. I am incorporating a number of our amendments, including my own. I am sure he was right that we should ask the Commission to examine the arguments and come back with a proposal within three years. The arguments deserve careful attention, but we must also be aware of the benefits of phosphates. We know from our Scandinavian colleagues that, provided there is good water and sewage treatment, phosphates can result in lower volumes of detergents being used and also lower water temperatures being necessary. I do not know, Madam President, whether you are one of the many who now use the tablet form in washing machines, but there has been a movement towards tablets containing phosphate, which can improve the efficiency of use.
One should recall the research from both Sweden and the Netherlands. The Stockholm water authority found that with phosphate substitutes there were on average ten times more suspended solids in their effluent, leading to a substantial increase in sludge; whereas phosphate products were found to be less damaging in terms of eco-toxicity towards micro-organisms. Research by the Dutch Institute of Environmental Sciences showed that use of phosphate-free detergents resulted in no improvement in surface water quality and led to eutrification worse, in many cases, than that experienced when phosphate-based detergents are used. The reason for that is that the alternatives were found to be so toxic that they killed the vital zooplankton that feed on algae and phytoplankton in naturally balanced fresh water.
We have here a sensible proposal. I do not accept the amendments tabled by the Green Group, which go too far, not least on the somewhat absurd eco-labelling proposals. This is a measure we could have taken through in one reading. I wish it well and again congratulate our rapporteur."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples