Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2008-10-21-Speech-2-493"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20081021.44.2-493"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, climate protection is the aim of us all. There are different methods, however, and they are not always recognisable at first glance. I have no objections to green procurement in cases where it makes sense. I reject this directive, anyway, aware though I am that my doing so will change little in terms of the overall outcome in Parliament. Nonetheless, I shall explain the reasons for my decision.
A first reading agreement on an important co-decision issue such as this, where more than a technical adjustment is at stake, undermines democracy. The fact is that the rapporteur, whose work I very much value, does not represent Parliament’s vote but only that of a committee and it is on this basis that he deals with the Council and the Commission. Parliament is ultimately excluded.
Secondly, the directive has been amended by the compromises to such an extent that it is more or less without content, yet entails considerable bureaucratic expenditure for local authorities. Bureaucracy is not free of charge, but it is often pointless. We are in this case contributing needlessly to further dissatisfaction with Europe on the part of Europeans and our local authorities.
Since many substantial parts of the directive have been toned down, I would have wanted the Council and the Commission to withdraw the whole thing. All the issues that are still relevant have already been regulated in the European context, or else no regulation is necessary or the issue concerned would have been better resolved on the basis of subsidiarity. Withdrawal would have sent out a signal that together we are taking the removal of bureaucracy seriously.
In my area there are, for example, very many local authorities that already make the relevant decisions via the EMAS system. The money expended in this way would have done a hundred times more for climate protection if it had been spent on methods for insulating public buildings.
For me, the question arises as to whether the directive is being pursued for its own sake or in order to bring about action. Most Europeans will not understand either approach."@en1
|
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples