Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2009-04-23-Speech-4-501"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20090423.70.4-501"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, I, too, would certainly like to add my thanks to the rapporteur, the shadow rapporteur and, above all, to Mrs Pleštinská and I would like to continue where Mrs Fourtou left off.
We did, after all, agree the Goods Package a year ago, and we had to resolve the difficult issue of CE-marking at that time. Commissioner Verheugen, the decision by the Socialist Group in the European Parliament to drag the compromise agreed then into this directive also has to do with the fact that the study that you commissioned was possibly not effectively represented in all parts of this House. You have a clear opportunity here, Commissioner, to press the Socialist Group more strongly not to ignore the results of the study. Perhaps there may also be some more recognition of this by tomorrow’s vote, particularly since the CE marking in this directive – in contrast to in the Goods Package – does not relate to consumer-relevant information but exclusively to product characteristics that really serve a different purpose in any case.
As a second point, the Construction Products Regulation has been very successful in helping push towards the completion of the internal market as, for one thing, we were able to successfully bring about the simplification of the regulations for small and medium-sized enterprises in many areas and, for another, we implemented the relaxations for microenterprises that were announced in the Small Business Act and which we had been asked for, explicitly and often, in various places.
I absolutely agree with the points that have been made in respect of the national standards institutes. We need a much stronger European internal market in this respect. It needs to be possible for a Spanish manufacturer to get a product authorised for Germany or Sweden by a standards institute in Spain rather than having to rely exclusively on the threading of the eye of a needle that is national approval by each national institute.
Furthermore, Commissioner, I warmly welcome what you had to say in respect of the regulation of chemicals. It took great efforts for us to bring about the REACH regulation, and we should not be adding new regulations on top of that for each new legislative proposal that relates to materials with one chemical connection or other.
There are a couple of points that we must deal with again when it comes to second reading. The first is the question of the regulations governing product claims. There must be more on this area, I would think, so that users genuinely obtain an effective insight. We must also prevent duplicate regulation. Annex 6, in my view, goes too far. The Low Voltage Directive and the Machinery Directive already cover many issues in this regard. There needs to be a careful reconsideration of whether there should be
regulations in this case. For the rest, Mrs Neris has produced a fundamentally sound basis for the vote at first reading."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata | |
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples