Go back to the Europarl portal

Choisissez la langue de votre document :

  • bg - български
  • es - español
  • cs - čeština
  • da - dansk
  • de - Deutsch
  • et - eesti keel
  • el - ελληνικά
  • en - English (Selected)
  • fr - français
  • ga - Gaeilge
  • hr - hrvatski
  • it - italiano
  • lv - latviešu valoda
  • lt - lietuvių kalba
  • hu - magyar
  • mt - Malti
  • nl - Nederlands
  • pl - polski
  • pt - português
  • ro - română
  • sk - slovenčina
  • sl - slovenščina
  • fi - suomi
  • sv - svenska
 Full text 
Thursday, 26 October 2017 - Strasbourg Revised edition

Implementation of the Environmental Liability Directive (debate)

  Jane Collins, on behalf of the EFDD Group. – Mr President, any operator that is responsible for damage to the environment must be held accountable for their actions. However, the determination of the accountability should be down to the Member State.

I am pleased to see that the ELD does not prevent Member States from adopting stricter rules – but who are you to grant that permission? You mention the establishment of a secondary liability regime based upon the systems already adopted by several Member States; one of those being the UK. But why a secondary regime? This is typical of the EU implementing more and more unnecessary legislation.

The report calls for the consideration of a European fund for the remedying of environmental damage. May I remind you the EU does not have its own money? The money that you waste comes from the Member States. So if you propose this fund who is going to pay for it? Because remember, one of your largest contributors will soon be leaving.

Legal notice