natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
Tilfælde som dem, som man for nogle år siden kom ud for i Storbritannien, i Cornwall, eller i Portugal, i Évora, har bragt spørgsmålet om drikkevandets kvalitet på forsiderne og på dagsordenen som et spørgsmål, der gør offentligheden opmærksom på miljøets problemer.
Nevertheless, it is important, and this has also been said here, that we are certain that the plans to get things on the right footing will come into be ing within the next five years at the latest.
Hr. Collins har tilføjet noget til direktivet, som ikke tidligere var i det, og som opfordrer til, at medlemsstaterne bliver forpligtet til at udarbejde en rapport og sende den til Kom missionen om anvendelsen af blyrør i husstande inden for deres områder og om inden for et tidsrum af fem år at fremlægge en plan om udskiftningen af blyrør i disse hus stande.
Mr Collins has added something to the directive which was not in it and which asks that the Member States be re quired to produce a report and forward it to the Commission on the incidence of lead piping in households within their territories and to come forward within five years with a plan to replace the lead piping in these homes.
Med andre ord er det medlemsstaterne og ikke Kommissionen, der skal udarbejde planen.
In other words, it is the Member States, not the Commission, which are to produce the plan.
Det ville være interessant at vide, om Kommissionen bakker denne idé op, eller om Kommissionen selv har i sinde at tackle an vendelsen af ikke blot blyrør i vandforsyningsanlæg, men også blyrør i private hjem.
It would be interesting to know whether the Commission backs this idea or whether the Commission itself has it in mind to tackle the incidence not simply of lead piping for the water suppliers but the lead piping in homes.
Der opstår således et større behov for kontrol med trihalomethaner (jeg gør opmærksom på, at der er adskillige net, hvor disse analyser ikke foretages), ligesom et behov for udskiftning på sigt af vandrør af bly.
In such a vital and influential matter as health and health care, we cannot afford to allow a policy, to exist that would end up in the quality of drinking water being bargained over, due to limitations in standards of quality.
De tal, jeg har set, relaterer til 1993, og de beløb sig til 2 milliarder pund i England og Wales for udskiftningen af vand forsyningsselskabernes blyrør og 6 milliarder pund for udskiftningen af rørene i private hjem.
The figures I have seen relate to 1993 and they came to £2 billion in England and Wales for the replacement of water companies' lead pipes and £6 billion for the replacement of domestic pipes.
Det er særdeles mange penge, og jeg ville være interesseret i at høre, om Kommissionen har nogen tal på dette.
That is a very large amount of money and I would be interested to know whether the Commission has any figures on that.
Endelig bør vi behandle dette spørgsmål med vores øjne åbne over for de sandsynlige omkostninger.
Finally, we have to go into this issue with our eyes open about the likely cost.
Vi har en for færdelig rekord i denne henseende, nemlig nitratdirektivet, som er vedtaget af Parlamentet og er blevet generelt ignoreret, fordi medlemsstaterne ikke har råd til at gen nemføre det.
We have a terrible record on this: for example, the nitrates directive, which has been on the statute book and is being widely ignored because the Member States cannot afford to implement it.
Det er således et godt forslag, der går herfra, ligesom det var et positivt forslag, der kom ud af førstebehandlingen.
Matikainen-Kallström (PPE). - (FI) Mr President, an nexed to the directive on drinking water is a classification of substances that can have an effect on the quality of drinking water according to their degree of danger.
Min uenighed vedrører, ligesom ved førstebehandlingen, klassificeringen af kobber som kemisk parameter i stedt for som indikatorparameter.
After Parliament's first reading, the Council changed the classification of copper and put it in the same class as poisons like arsenic.
Vi mener, at Kommissionens holdning ikke har udviklet sig.
Copper has been a good, safe and durable material for making drinking water pipes for many decades in Europe.
Idet jeg citerer min kollega Collins, synes det, som om der har været større opmærksomhed over for andre lobbier, måske dem, der har med kobbererstatning at gøre, end over for en nøjagtighed i relation til de forefindende un dersøgelser.
Ephremidis (GUE/NGL). - (EL) Mr President, this is a positive directive since it finally regulates a very impor tant issue which concerns human health.
Og derfor har vi igen underskrevet et æn dringsforslag, der sigter mod at få gjort kobber til indikatorparameter inden for dette direktivs rammer.
It is also positive in that it provides for a five-year period for the replace ment of lead piping, which, as is well known, has harmful and dangerous effects on health.
Jackson (PPE). - (EN) Hr. formand, som andre hilser jeg dette direktiv og betænkningen om det velkomment.
However, there are negative aspects to this directive.
Det er et vigtigt direktiv, fordi det forenkler det oprindeligt
Since this is the case the directive retains copper in Annex lb.
Ephremidis (GUE/NGL). - (EL) Hr. formand, direktivet er positivt, fordi der nu endelig sker en regulering af et vigtigt område for sundheden.
It is true that copper is dangerous in large doses, but our bodily system actually needs small amounts of it, which is what the Commission did itself acknowledge.
Det er også positivt, fordi det forudsætter, at man i løbet af en femårsperiode erstatter de rørledninger af bly, der som bekendt har negative og farlige sundhedsmæssige virkninger. Men der er også negative elementer i direktivet.
In a study undertaken by the World Health Organization in 1997 it was stated that there was no scientific evidence that the use of copper as a material for manufacturing pipes for drinking water would lead to health-related problems caused by drinking water.
For det første er kobber stadigt opført i bilag IB, selvom Kommissionens egen vi denskabelige komité og WHO i sin gennemgang fra 1997 har fastslået, at der ikke er direkte sundhedsfarlige følger af brugen af kobber i rørledninger.
Another study done in Stockholm in 1997 showed that copper is not harmful to babies. If copper comes into contact with a group of noxious substances it is easily replaced by those other materials, the effect of which is unknown.
På trods heraf står det stadig opført i 1B, og samtidig er der mærkeligt nok ingen henvisninger fra Kommissionen og Rådets side til bro-
In this world of all sorts of additives, colouring agents and preservatives, it is right that the quality of our drinking water is controlled, and this report is on the right track in this respect, but there should be moderation in everything.
Det er godt, at vores drikkevand i verden i dag med alle mulige tillægs-, farve-og konserveringsstoffer kontrolleres, og betænkningen er en skridt i den rigtige retning, men der må være måde med alting.
Reference to Article 4, section 1(a), is acceptable, but at present, it is too early to introduce parameters into Annex 1 part B. I especially welcome the idea of a study of hormone-like substances, provided, of course, that the neces sary budgetary funds are made available and approved by Parliament.
mioner, ionbromider og asbest, der som bekendt er kræft fremkaldende og også fremkalder andre sygdomme.
However, it is neither necessary nor appropriate to convert this idea into a directive.
Bjerregaard, medlem af Kommissionen. - Hr. formand, på Kommissionens vegne vil jeg gerne takke medlem merne af Europa-Parlamentet for den omhyggelige gen nemgang af Rådets fælles holdning.
Bjerregaard, Member of the Commission. - (DA) Mr President, on behalf of the Commission, I would like to thank the Members for their thorough treatment of the Council's common position.
Jeg var også glad for de bemærkninger, som ordføreren, hr. Ken Collins, frem satte om samarbejdet mellem Kommissionen og Europa-Parlamentet.
I also appreciated the com ments by the rapporteur, Mr Ken Collins, on the collaboration between the Commission and the European Parliament.
Også vi finder, at det har været godt, og at hele proceduren har været gennemført i fuld åbenhed og dermed også har givet mulighed for at inddrage NGO'erne, som hr. Collins fremhævede.
We, too, found this extremely positive, with the en tire procedure being handled in complete openness, thus also making it possible to involve too the NGOs Mr Collins particularly mentioned.
Inden jeg kom mer med mine bemærkninger til ændringsforslagene, vil jeg gerne fremhæve, at Rådets fælles holdning kom i stand efter meget vanskelige og også ganske langvarige diskussioner mellem Rådet og Kommissionen.
Before making my own com ments on the amendments, I would like to emphasize that the Council's common position took shape in the wake of tough, long-drawn-out negotiations between the Council and the Commission.
Nogle af bestemmelserne er sådan set ikke helt til Kommissionens tilfredshed, men set i sin helhed finder jeg imidlertid, at det er et acceptabelt kompromis, som Kommissionen går fuldt ind for.
Thus, some of the provisions are not entirely to the satisfaction of the Commission, but on the whole, this is an acceptable compromise, fully endorsed by the Commission.
Det ændrede forslag sikrer en større fleksibilitet ved fjernelsen af forbehold i artikel 13.
Finally, we come to the provisions regarding lead, that is, Amendments Nos 12 and 28, which Mrs Jackson particularly mentioned.
Den foreliggende for slagsform svarer også bedre til miljøkravene end den tid ligere.
The rapporteur's idea of requiring re ports from Member States on how to tackle the problem of lead is an interesting one.
Man skal være parat til at betale for godt drikkevand.
The Commission has proposed 15 years, and this has been accepted by the Council.
I så livsvigtige spørgsmål med en helhedspåvirkning af sund heden og sundhedsplejen har vi ikke råd til at tillade politik, som gennem forbehold med hensyn til kvalitetsstandard vil muliggøre et nedslag i kvaliteten af drikkevand.
It is to be hoped that this period strikes a reason able balance between considerations of public health and the practical difficulties of complying with the standards, and Mrs Jackson's point about the costs of the existing proposal should perhaps be mentioned.
På denne baggrund kan følgende accepteres: Ændringsforslag nr. 6, 8, 15 og 19 kan accepteres fuldt ud.
With this in mind, the following can be accepted: Amend ments Nos 6, 8, 15 and 19 can be accepted in their en tirety.
Æn dringsforslag nr. 12, som fru Jackson specielt spurgte til, og 29 kan delvist accepteres.
Amendments Nos 12, which Mrs Jackson particularly asked about, and 29 can be accepted in part.
I princippet også ændringsforslag 13, 26 og 30.
In prin ciple, Amendments Nos 13,26 and 30 are acceptable.
Kommissionen kan ikke acceptere følgende ændringsforslag: 1-5,7,9-11, 14, 16-18,20-25, 27, 28 og endelig 31-34.
The Commission cannot accept the following amendments: 15,7, 9-11, 14, 16-18, 20-25, 27, 28 and finally 31-34.
Lad mig kort kommentere de vigtigste ændringsforslag, også fordi de naturligvis har spillet en rolle i debatten her i dag.
Let me briefly comment on the most significant amendments, not least because they have figured in today's debate.
Til sidst vil jeg sige om kobberspørgsmålet, at det først og fremmest bør ses som et spørgsmål om sundhed, og vi bør forholde os til det ud fra dette standpunkt.
The pro posal for a more stringent limit on THM cannot, however, be accepted. Let me also state that the reference to Direc tive 89/106 on building materials is a very useful amend ment; it is acceptable in its present form.
Først dispensationsordningen, og det vil sige ændringsforslag 16,17 og 22.
First, I will consider the derogations, that is, Amendments Nos 16, 17 and 22.
Kommissionen har accepteret de for slag, som Parlamentet fremkom med under førstebehandlingen, og indarbejdet dem i forslaget. Rådet har imidlertid siden ændret dem, da dette spørgsmål var blandt de vanskeligste under forhandlingerne.
The Commission has accepted the pro posals put forward by the House at first reading; these have been incorporated into the proposal.
Jeg vil dog under strege, at der kun gives dispensationer, når der ikke foreligger nogen sundhedsfare.
I must emphasize, however, that derogations will only be granted when health is not at stake.
Dispensationer vil blive tidsbegrænset, og Kommissionen vil være involveret.
Derogations will be time-restricted, and the Commission will be in volved.
Der er således taget hensyn til Parlamentets største betænkelig heder.
Thus, the major reservations of the House have been taken into consideration.
Jeg tror desværre, at det ville være meget vanskeligt at genforhandle dette punkt med Rådet.
Unfortunately, my impression is that it would be extremely difficult to renegotiate this point with Council.
Matikainen-Kallström (PPE). - (Fl) Hr. formand, i et bilag til det aktuelle drikkevandsdirektiv er forskellige stoffer, som har indvirkning på drikkevandskvaliteten, klassificeret på basis af risikograden.
In conclusion, allow me to make a few comments on copper. As Mr Collins stated, all the amendments were re jected by the Committee on the Environment, and yet it seems to have played a part in the proceedings.
Efter Parlamentets førstebehandling har Rådet ændret kobbers klassifikation, så kobber hører til den samme klasse som gifte, som arsenik.
This has at least been emphasized by a number of Parliamentarians speaking today. The Commission's proposal followssthe limit value for copper put forward by the World Health Organization, WHO.
I Europa har kobber været et godt, sikkert og holdbart materiale til drikkevandsledninger i flere årtier.
This value was not changed in the WHO'S ongoing review that took place in Geneva in April 1997.
Hvis Rådets forslag bliver accepteret, og kobber klassificeres som værende giftig, får forbrugeren et helt forkert signal.
Since the basis for this value is health, it is reasonable to retain it in Annex 1, part B. Should new documentation be produced warranting a change in the classification of copper, this will obviously be taken into account.
Så er der parametrene for radioaktivitet, og det drejer sig om ændringsforslag 23 og 26, som både ordføreren, hr. Collins, og hr. Lannoye var inde på. Det glæder mig at kunne meddele, at Kommissionen kan acceptere indførelsen af parametre for radioaktivitet i direktivets bilag 1, del C, som handler om indikatorparametre.
The rapporteur, Mr Collins, and Mr Lannoye both men tioned parameters for radioactivity, touching on Amend ments Nos 23 and 26.1 am delighted to be able to report that the Commission accepts the introduction of parameters for radioactivity in Annex 1 part C of the directive, dealing with indicator parameters.
Det er første gang, sådanne parametre indføjes i et direktiv, der ikke er omfattet af EURATOM-traktaten, så jeg vil gerne lykønske Parlamentet med dette ændringsforslag.
This is the first time such parameters have been incorporated into a directive not covered by the Euratom Treaty, so I must congratulate the House on this amendment.
Det er sandt, at i for store mængder er kobber farligt, men vores organer har behov for kobber i små mængder, og dette har Kommissionen også før konstateret.
The Commission agrees with the section of the amend ment dealing with prior consultation with Parliament.
Det er også videnskabeligt konstateret, at mangel på kobber er en større ulempe end en overdosis af kobber.
However, I would like to draw the attention of the House to the fact that this is already covered in Article 11, section 1.
I en redegørelse udført af Verdenssundhedsorganisationen i 1997 konstateres det, at der ikke findes noget videnskabeligt bevis for, at anvendelsen af kobber som materiale til vandrør har en skadelig virkning på drikkevandet.
Adjustments can only be made to parameters for copper and other parameters following a Parliamentary hearing, since this is a matter of procedure under Article 189c. Finally, I would like to quote the comments of the rapporteur, Mr Collins, to the effect that many other pro visions in this directive are more important than this one point concerning copper.
Så er der ændringsforslagene 8,25 og 30, som vedrører de hormonlignende stoffer.
Amendments Nos 8, 25 and 30 then deal with hormonelike substances.
Kommissionen har selvfølgelig
The same applies to the question the rapporteur asked the Commission.
For kobber og for alle andre parametre i bilag 1 kan der kun foretages en justering efter høring af Parlamentet, da der er tale om en artikel 189 C­procedure.
12.5.98 ization does not, as a matter of fact, recognize copper as being as hazardous as the committee says it is here.
Matikainen­Kallström (PPE). ­ (Fl) Hr. Formand, jeg vil bare præcisere, at i indlægget om kobber har det ikke været hensigten at ændre kobberets grænseværdi, men at ændre den fra gruppe Β til gruppe C. Vi er helt enige om grænseværdien.
Matikainen-Kallström (PPE). - (FI) Mr President, I would only like to focus on the fact that in the speeches that related to the subject of copper there was no intention of changing the limit value of copper, but its classification, from B to C. We all fully agree on its limit value.
Det er imid­lertid ikke nødvendigt eller hensigtsmæssigt at nedfælde denne idé i et direktiv.
President. - I now give the floor to Mrs Flemming, but may I remind you that these questions must not turn into a second debate.
Formanden. ­ Fru Matikainen­Kallström, det syntes mig mere en kommentar end som et spørgsmål.
President. - That, Mrs Matikainen-Kallström, seems to me to be more of a comment than a question.
Jeg tror der­for, at vi kan gå videre i dette tilfælde, men der er også fru Baldi, der ønsker at stille et spørgsmål.
I therefore think we must let it pass, but Mrs Baldi also has a question she would like to put. ·
Baldi (UPE). ­ (IT) Hr. formand, jeg vil gerne vide, om Kommissionen finder det berettiget at medtage kobber blandt de kemiske produkter ­ eller snarere^giftstoffer ­som arsenik, cyanmetal, kviksølv og bly, selvom WHO har erklæret, at et niveau på 2 mg. kobber pr. liter drikke­vand er et passende sikkerhedsniveau.
Baldi (UPE). - (IT) Mr President, I would like to know whether the Commission believes it is right to include copper among the chemical products, or rather the poisons, such as arsenic, cyanide, mercury and lead, despite the fact that the WHO has declared that a level of 2 milligrams of copper per litre of drinking water provides an adequate level of safety.
Så er der endelig bestemmelserne om bly, det vil sige æn­dringsforslag 12 og 28, som især fru Jackson var inde på.
Flemming (PPE). - (DE) Mr President, it has been stated that copper presents no risk to health. That is simply in correct.
Ændringsforslag 28, hvori der foreslås 10 år til at overholde blynormerne, kan ikke accepteres.
There was a case in Austria where a mother prepared tea for her child every day with the first water that came out of the tap in the morning.
Kommissi­onen har foreslået 15 år, og det har Rådet accepteret.
This water contained copper accumulated overnight from the copper piping.
(FR) Jeg vil bare spørge kommissæ­ren, om det går op for hende, hvilken virkning hendes be­slutning vedrørende kobber kan få.
Grossetête (PPE). - (FR) I would simply like to ask the Commissioner if she realizes the impact her decision may have with regard to copper.
I rigtigt mange lande er rørsystemet til drikkevand på nuværende tidspunkt af kobber.
In very many countries, we currently have water mains pipes made from copper.
Når man klassificerer kobber sammen med arse­nik, forleder man befolkningen til at tro, at det er farligt.
By classifying these pipes in the same way as arsenic, you could mislead people into thinking that they are danger ous.
Det, mener jeg, er en virkelig alvorlig sag.
I think this is particularly serious.
Så er der endelig ændringsforslag 24 og 29, trihalometha­ner, THM'er. Tanken med en rapport i lighed med den om blyparametrene accepteres også.
Will the Commissioner agree with me that the copper in dustry should be congratulated because of the efficiency with which it has been able to persuade people, who otherwise know nothing at all about copper, of the efficacy of the case?
Forslaget om en stren­gere værdi for THM kan imidlertid ikke accepteres. Lad mig også sige, at henvisningen til byggevaredirektivet 89/106 er en meget nyttig ændring, som kan accepteres i den foreliggende form.
Will she further agree with me that the committee over whelmingly threw out the copper amendments because it believed that it was not a question of copper being out lawed as a means of conducting water to households, but of a means of making sure that we operated proper health standards?
Ephremidis (GUE/NGL). ­ (EL) Hr. formand, med ud­gangspunkt i det, som fru kommissæren sagde, kan jeg meddele, at jeg har det på skrift fra ansvarlige organisati­oner, at WHO's revision af 1997 fastslog, at der ikke er videnskabeligt grundlag for de omtalte oxidvirkninger af kobber i drikkevand, ligesom det karakteriserede den ind­stilling, det før havde givet, som midlertidig, og jeg af­slutter spørgsmålet nu, Kommissionen har selv indrøm­met, at anvendelse af kobbermaterialer i distributionsled­ninger til vand ikke i sig selv er sundhedsfarligt, hvilket fremgår af dokument KOM(94)0612.
Ephremidis (GUE/NGL). - (EL) Mr President, on the basis of what the Commissioner has said, I have a written text from competent organizations to the effect that the 1997 revision of the WTO accepted that there was no scientific basis for the rumoured acute effects on health of copper in drinking water and described the recommendation which it had made at that time as provisional.
Jeg spørger, fordi fru kommissæren, uden at svare mig selv, har givet for­skellige svar på forskellige spørgsmål, og vil det sige, at det er forkert, det der fremgår af dokumentet?
And, to finish my question, that same Commission, in document COM(94)612, accepted that the use of materials from copper in the water distribution system was not in itself harmful to the public health.
Eller er det sådan, at fru kommissæren ikke er fuldt informeret og svarer på den måde for at forsvare, at hun ikke accepterer ændringsforslagene om, at kobber flyttes fra IB til IC, og af'samme grund tav om det forhold, at asbest ikke er med­taget som et farligt stof?
Does it not stand up to scrutiny? Or perhaps the Commissioner was not fully informed and answered in that way in order to stick . to the fact that she did not accept the amendments, in other words to transfer copper from IB to 1C, and re mained silent with regard to the failure to mention asbestos as one of the dangerous materials.
Lad mig afslutningsvis fremsætte nogle bemærkninger om kobber.
Nobody is suggesting that copper should be replaced in households.
Det har i hvert fald været fremhævet af ganske mange af de parla­mentarikere, der har haft ordet her i dag.
What we are doing is in fact making sure that when households receive that water, these households are healthy.
Kommissionen har i forslaget fulgt den grænseværdi for kobber, som Verdenssundhedsorganisationen, WHO, har foreslået.
Will the Commissioner agree with that assessment of the situation and will she agree that the Environment Com mittee - which, incidentally, was not attended by any of the people who have raised this matter - will she agree with me that the Environment Committee got it right?
Under WHO's løbende revision, der fandt sted i Genève i april 1997, blev denne værdi ikke ændret.
Miranda (GUE/NGL). - (PT) Mr President, still on the subject of copper, I would like to raise a question I men tioned in my speech, which has not been answered by the Commissioner.
Såfremt der fremkommer ny dokumenta­tion, som kan begrunde en ændring af kobbers klassifice­ring, er det klart, at der vil blive taget hensyn hertil.
And I put it quite bluntly: what product are we going to use to replace copper and what research has so far been carried out on the proposed replacement?