Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2004-03-30-Speech-2-282"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2004-03-30"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Århus Convention2
dcterms:Language	"sv"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20040330.11.2-282"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2004-03-30-Speech-2-2832
lpv:speaker	lp:Astrid Thors2
lpv:spokenAs	member; Temporary committee on improving safety at sea (2003-11-20--2004-04-21)3 substitute; Committee on Legal Affairs and the Internal Market (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3 unknown; Svenska folkpartiet (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 vice-chair; PETI (2002-01-23--2004-07-19)3 member; Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3 substitute; Delegation to the European Economic Area Joint Parliamentary Committee (EEA) (2002-02-07--2004-07-19)3 member; Delegation to the EU-Latvia Joint Parliamentary Committee (2002-02-07--2004-04-30)3 member_of_the_bureau; ELDR (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, on my own behalf and that of many of my group colleagues, I should first like to focus on the Directive on access to justice. As has been said quite rightly today, the Directive impinges deeply on the administrative and legal systems of many countries. There is also reason to wonder whether the legal basis is correct. It has been interesting to note that the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy approved this Directive, and suppressed a proposal to reject it, by only 17 votes to 16. For many of us, it is an ideological question why environmental organisations should enjoy a privileged position compared to other organisations. Through our request for a split vote on Amendment No 40, you can correct that. Only last week, Commissioner, events in the North Sea showed that fishermen’s organisations have the same need for, and should have at least the same right to, access to justice as BirdLife or other powerful international organisations. Many of us share the deep ideological conviction that other environmental organisations, too, should have this right. We must not have some organisations that are more equal than others. In my opinion, this whole debate has raised the following question. What is the added value of the Directive other than to give us a deadline for the implementation of the Århus Convention? This deadline could be obtained by means of a considerably simpler regulatory framework than the rather complicated situation we have at present. As regards the application of the Århus Convention to the Community and also the correction that we want to make to the Directive, we have every opportunity of achieving these objectives by means of good governance."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph