Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-09-05-Speech-1-094"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20050905.19.1-094"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, I should like to start by thanking the European Parliament and the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety and, more importantly, its rapporteur, Mr Sjöstedt, for their painstaking preparation of this recommendation for second reading.
secondly, that no exemption is allowed from the main environmental safeguarding clauses in the directive relating to the safe design, operation, closure and after-closure of waste facilities.
However, I would like to point out that the Commission is willing to examine in a positive spirit any other possibility for compromise which may arise. I trust that we shall complete the procedure for this proposal as quickly as possible. We need the new directive, which will safeguard the environmentally correct management of mining waste both during the day-to-day operation of waste facilities and in the event of a major accident.
With the consequences of the serious accidents caused by mining waste in Aznalcollar in Spain in 1998 and in Baia Mare in Romania in 2000 still fresh, the aim of the proposal for a Commission directive was to introduce rules at European Union level in a bid to minimise the repercussions which storing waste in tailings dams or heaps has on the environment and on human health, both under normal operating conditions and in the event of an accident.
In conjunction with the revised Sevezo II Directive on the control of major industrial accidents and a document on best available practices, the proposed directive will safeguard the proper management of waste from extractive industries throughout the European Union.
At first reading, the Commission accepted in full, in part or in principle 46 of the 74 amendments tabled by the European Parliament, in that they clarified and improved the text, while remaining consistent with the format and approach of the original Commission proposal. Forty-one amendments have now been incorporated into the common position either verbatim or materially.
The Council discussed the proposal during the Irish and Dutch Presidencies; it soon became apparent that a significant majority of the Member States considered that the scope of the Commission proposal was excessively ambitious and implied spending which they felt was out of proportion with the probable risks.
The Commission considers that many of the changes adopted in the common position improve its initial proposal. Most importantly, the provisions relating to inert waste have been extended, licensing procedures have been detailed, references to Community standards have been increased, especially to the standards adopted in the framework directive on water, demands for the long-term stability of waste facilities have been reinforced, stricter limit values have been set for cyanide compounds and an inventory of closed, abandoned sites has now been demanded.
At the same time, the Council, which is interested in the principle of proportionality, has granted the Member States the facility to exempt non-hazardous, non-inert waste from certain provisions of the directive, especially from the need for a financial guarantee.
The Commission would prefer the wording of its initial proposal, which did not allow such exemptions. However, the Commission has decided to support the common position, taking account of the fact:
first, that no general exemption from the basic provisions of the directive is allowed and the competent authorities in the Member States will decide on a case-by-case basis and"@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples