Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2008-09-04-Speech-4-049"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20080904.5.4-049"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, one of the points mentioned in the speech by the President-in-Office of the Council on this subject was that it is a highly sensitive issue. I agree with that completely. I will go further than that: I am, I believe, the first speaker up to now who can say in no uncertain terms that he does not see the need for a directive like this. I do not see why Europe has to have another directive. Why do I think that?
In the first place, we already have many directives relating to the soil that affect the health of the soil and the soil environment. Just think of the Water Directive, the Groundwater Directive, the Nitrates Directive, the 18 Directives relating to cross-compliance. All of these have an influence on the health of the soil. In Europe – and this is true in France and everywhere else – we are weighed down by too many administrative rules. The average farmer needs more time to fill in forms about all manner of things than he has to do his normal work on the farm. If there were to be yet another directive on top of all that, then that would be too much of a good thing.
We should first of all wait to see the results of the directives we already have: whether they are not enough and whether they do not make an adequate contribution to restoring the soil to a healthy condition. The Groundwater Directive will only come into operation in 2009, and so it is completely unnecessary to introduce a new directive before then. The Commission has produced a proposal and has calculated what the benefits will be. What I did not see anywhere in the calculation is what the administrative burden of implementing all this will be for those concerned. I will say it again: too much time is being wasted on administrative tasks, on filling in forms, on meetings and I do not know what else.
What could be done at this point in time? The Commission could play a very important role in the exchange of experience. There are certain countries that have already gone a very long way in restoring the soil to a healthy condition and there are other countries that have not. The countries that have already done this have done it without any help from Europe. Why not use those good examples for the countries that still have a problem?
Once again, I think that we have too much red tape at the moment and that Europe and the European Union in general will certainly not make itself more popular with the citizens by piling one regulation on top of another and then saying to them ‘just get on with it’. No, let us reduce it as much as possible and follow the example of the Member States that could serve as examples for the other countries."@en1
|
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples