Mr President, I would like to congratulate the rapporteur on the work he has done so far. I am quite sure we can carry on with this work and make sure that we have a good result in the end. I also want to start by congratulating the Commission – yes, I do mean it! When we started to look at this proposal we had to bear in mind that it came out of the original discussions on the control of VOC emissions from some years ago when we first looked at the problem: the emission of VOCs from large industrial plants, from large garages, from large petrol stations and so forth. At that point we recognised there was a serious problem. Yes, we could take action to control large-point sources – and we did. We asked the Commission to come forward with some proposals to solve the other problem we had identified at that time, which was the hundreds of thousands of small-point sources across the Union in different places, largely associated with the use of paints, but many other issues as well. Sometimes it was small garage paint-shops, sometimes it was domestic use of paint, sometimes it was other substances in other places. I wish to thank and congratulate the Commission. It has actually tackled this issue as we asked it to do. It has brought forward a proposal which is very good, not quite perfect – but nothing ever is – and is taking a proposal from this Parliament seriously and acting on it. The Commission has also recognised that this proposal to reduce VOC emissions is going to have an important effect on the environment. It is going to reduce ground-level ozone. It is going to make sure that we reduce the incidence of asthma caused by ground-level ozone. It is going to cut plant damage. It is going to reduce other environmental effects. It has not been easy to come forward with this proposal. It has disclosed a large number of technical issues that we had not originally foreseen. We thank the Commission for tackling those complex issues we did not at first expect. Mr Davies has already mentioned that there are some technical issues that we still have to tackle. We cannot ignore, for example, some of these issues which are still left on the table. I appeal to the Commission to accept the amendments proposed by some of my colleagues on the question of occupational health and the impact upon the health of workers in these circumstances. This is an issue we cannot ignore. We have to go forward with it. We should also mention the importance of maintaining a degree of choice and competition in the marketplace for consumers. We should therefore continue to uphold the equal technical criteria for all paints and not give an unfair advantage to water-based paints. Let us have those options available to people. Let the market be free. Let us have some competition. Let us stay inside the equal label criteria we already have. Finally, we have to recognise the real difficulties of applying these new proposals in every circumstance and on every application that we find in the vast array of options inside the European Union. I would ask the Commission to think carefully about some of the exceptions we have looked at here: small quantities of paints prepared in traditional ways, often for traditional uses, whether it be for old cars or for buildings. There are many old buildings in Britain. It is a place where we perhaps have too many old buildings which in some cases require specialist, old fashioned, old-style paints to maintain their fabric. I appeal to you to have some respect, not just for the present environment that we live in, not just for public health, but for the old environment, the built environment, the one we are trying to preserve. It would not hurt too much to accept amendments on those questions as well and to give us a rounded proposal we can all be proud of, that we might even get a second-reading agreement on.

Political group: PSE