Mr President, Commissioner Wallström, we thank you for being here at this time in the evening. The Community Eco-management and Audit Scheme is not exactly the most popular of the environmental issues but, nevertheless, it is a fantastic instrument for making progress in the field of integrating economic activities and the preservation of the environment. By adopting a system of environmental management, companies – whether they be industrial or service companies – learn to integrate environmental considerations into the normal management of the company, discovering the many and significant advantages, not only environmental but also economic, which this offers them, amongst other things, because they improve their competitive position. It therefore seems to me very significant that this regulation is currently being reviewed and that new elements are being incorporated into it which are extremely useful for the environmental improvement of processes, services and products. The creation of more incentives for European companies to have access to the system, the participation of interested parties – especially workers –, the strengthening of reliability vis-à-vis third parties and an increase in the transparency of information are the main objectives of the amendments which I took up on first reading in Parliament and which were approved unanimously in the Environment Committee. Nevertheless, the committee also approved certain amendments which were contrary to the opinion of the rapporteur, and I have continued to disagree with them. In this respect, I wish to refer to Amendments Nos 5, 6, 10 and 17, on the controversial issue of the use of the best available technology, as an instrument for environmental improvement, being obligatory for countries which wish to be included in the EMAS register. Let us remember that EMAS is a voluntary market instrument. Let us remember also that one of the main objectives of the current revision of the regulations is to make the system more accessible to small and medium-sized businesses and also the service sector. Let us add that until now the initiative has been relatively successful when compared to the other alternative formula, the ISO 14.001 standard, which is more flexible in many ways than EMAS. Let us bear in mind that the best available technology, as defined by the Directive on Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control, is only applicable to large industrial plants and not to the service sector or to small and medium-sized businesses. In this light, I believe that you will agree with me when I say that, although I am absolutely in favour of development and progress with regard to the Directive on Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control (IPPC), this is not the time, and EMAS is not the right instrument, to demand that companies who want to join the scheme adopt the best available technologies. In fact, the large plants, as stipulated in the IPPC Directive, will continue to be obliged to be included in the EMAS register, since they will have to abide by the environmental legislation in force – Amendment No 12 – which obviously includes compliance with the IPPC Directive in the cases where companies are affected. I would also like to insist on Amendments Nos 41 and 50, which my Group would be prepared to accept as long as it is made clear that the word ‘representatives’ refers to people chosen as such within each company and in no event to organisations, whose participation would hinder and delay the process of adopting the system. I hope that tomorrow other groups will offer oral amendments in this respect. There are two other amendments which I would like to comment on: Amendment No 19, for which I have requested a separate vote up to the paragraph which reads “public structures and public contracts”, up to this point leaving the Commission’s text intact. I believe that the Commission is preparing – and in this sense I would be grateful for a comment from Mrs Wallström – a proposal on the inclusion of the environmental principle as a necessary consideration when awarding public contracts, and I therefore think it appropriate to await the approval of that proposal. With regard to Amendment No 22, on the incorporation of the Commission, the Council and Parliament, within a period of four years, into the EMAS system, I have consulted the Commission in writing and I would like the Commissioner to reply to it. Lastly, Amendment No 25 refers to the harmonisation of EMAS with the ISO standard, which is very important to the dissemination of each instrument, and we are very happy with the harmonisation agreement relating to them.

Political group: PPE-DE