Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-07-04-Speech-2-389"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2006-07-04"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Shipments of radioactive waste and nuclear spent fuel (debate)2
dcterms:Language	"de"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20060704.35.2-389"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2006-07-04-Speech-2-3902
lpv:speaker	lp:Rebecca Harms2
lpv:spokenAs	unknown; Bündnis 90/Die Grünen (2004-07-20--2009-07-13)3 substitute; ENVI (2004-07-21--2007-01-14)3 member; G/EFA (2004-07-20--2007-02-26)3 member; Delegation to the EU-Ukraine Parliamentary Cooperation Committee (2004-09-15--2009-07-13)3 substitute; Delegation to the EU-Russia Parliamentary Cooperation Committee (2004-09-15--2009-07-13)3 member; ITRE (2004-07-21--2007-01-14)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, I would like, first of all, to thank Mr Seppänen for being so very aware of the problems as regards the market conditions for such a difficult commodity as nuclear waste or spent fuel rods. I would like, once more, to explain two amendments from my group that are of particular concern to me, namely Amendments 24 and 25, which deal specifically with the export of nuclear waste and spent fuel rods to third countries, and my particular concern is with exports to Russia. Those who make it their business to know about these things will already have heard the names of Mayak or Chelyabinsk, sites in the Urals where, for decades, not only Soviet waste but also, and increasingly, European waste is reprocessed or accepted for storage, and where incidents keep occurring. It is not only, however, when accidents occur, but also in the normal course of operations, that enormous amounts of radioactivity are discharged, causing serious pollution in the rivers and lakes of the Urals, to a considerably greater extent, moreover, than that seen in some parts of the exclusion zone around Chernobyl. The situation we have ended up in makes dual standards impossible; since such facilities could not be operated in the EU, Europeans should not be sending their waste there for storage, disposal or reprocessing, and it can no longer be really demonstrated that reprocessing – that is, the further recovery of these nuclear materials – is still going on there, since no comprehensible summary whatever of what is reprocessed and reused is available to the public. If we continue to allow thousands of tonnes of nuclear waste from the European Union to be exported to Russia, then we are taking upon ourselves a responsibility even and ever greater than that which – I emphasise, since it is not only now that the export is starting – we already bear for the lamentably poor state of the environment in the region around Mayak and Chelyabinsk and of the health of the people who live there. I am positively convinced that the responsibility for resolving the problems with nuclear waste should generally be accepted by those countries that dump these problems on the world. It is not Russia that is responsible for our nuclear waste, but rather our own countries themselves."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph