Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-09-05-Speech-2-222"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2006-09-05"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Emission allowance trading scheme: national allocation plans (2008-2012) (debate)2
dcterms:Language	"de"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20060905.24.2-222"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2006-09-05-Speech-2-2232
lpv:speaker	lp:Peter Liese2
lpv:spokenAs	member; ENVI (2004-07-21--2007-01-14)3 member; EPP-ED (2004-07-20--2009-07-13)3 unknown; Christlich Demokratische Union Deutschlands (2004-07-20--2009-07-13)3 substitute; ITRE (2004-07-22--2007-01-14)3 member; Delegation for relations with the countries of Central America (2004-09-15--2007-03-13)3 substitute; Delegation to the EU-Mexico Joint Parliamentary Committee (2004-09-15--2009-07-13)3
lpv:translated text	"( ) Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, Commissioner, climate change is one of the most crucial challenges that politicians such as ourselves have to face. Although emissions trading was intended to be one of the principal instruments in meeting this challenge head-on, it has to be said that the results achieved to date from its initial stage are not really convincing. It was planned that emissions trading should start on 1 January 2005, but there are many Member States in which that did not happen. The national allocation plans – including those approved by the Commission in the first phase – were not really ambitious, and what really did, of course, annoy businesses in the countries with fairly ambitious plans, was that the criteria for the grant of emissions certificates varied to a very considerable degree, so that, for example, a steelworks or a chalk plant got far more emissions certificates in one country than in another. These disparities were not merely a consequence of the burden sharing required by Kyoto; in some cases, they had been exaggerated, and that, of course, resulted in competition being distorted. During the process of framing the resolution on emissions trading, which was done by codecision, this House argued in favour of very clear and precise rules, to which the Commission’s response was that these were quite unnecessary, and that things could be managed, and excesses avoided, by the use of competition law. I get the impression that the Commission needs to take another, rather closer look and prevent distortions of competition between the Member States and between enterprises within them. As far as the next stage is concerned, the objective must not be – as it was in the first – that emissions trading should work more or less; on the contrary, it must work well. Distortions of competition must, in so far as is possible, be avoided, and, if European policy is to be credible, the maximum possible reductions in CO2 must be achieved."@en1
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata	"DE"1 "Peter Liese (PPE-DE )."1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph