Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/1999-11-17-Speech-3-047"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"1999-11-17"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Statement by Mr Solana2
dcterms:Language	"en"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.19991117.2.3-047"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:1999-11-17-Speech-3-0482
lpv:speaker	lp:Patricia McKENNA2
lpv:spoken text	"First of all, unlike many other speakers, I am not happy with the decision taken on Monday and, Mr Solana, as a former pacifist turned militarist, I would actually feel that your role within the WEU is a further compromising of neutral states. Now there are a significant number in my group from neutral and non-neutral countries alike who are actually very much against the whole idea of the creation of a European defence identity, and the debate within the neutral countries is being conducted in an extremely dishonest fashion. You yourself said that Monday was a historic occasion and that is true. It was a historic occasion. It was the first time that there was a formal meeting of defence ministers, and the decisions that were taken were historic. However, within the neutral states, the public is being misled. In fact, it is being brushed over as a non-event. For example, our Foreign Minister said that he was quite happy with the decisions taken: he said that the interests of neutral countries were taken on board and that they were met within the opinion which was submitted by the EU Political Committee. In that opinion, it states that your role will be confined to what is set out in the Treaty on the European Union and also on the decisions taken at the European Council meeting in Cologne. That actually is quite a broad perspective and anything can happen within that. Within the Western European Union the issue of the mutual defence guarantee is even stronger than within NATO; within the neutral countries the general opinion at the moment is that the mutual defence commitment does not apply. But, I believe and many people within the neutral countries believe that when further decisions are taken, eventually the mutual defence commitment will be applied. I also believe that, as Commissioner Patten mentioned, this involves basically the whole issue of a European arms industry. His statement gives credence to our fears about the creation of a European arms industry. The St Malo Summit concluded that the EU needed, and I quote, ‘strengthened armed forces that can react rapidly to the new risks and which are supported by a strong and competitive European defence industry and technology’. There are many Member States within the European Union which are not involved in the arms industry and do not want to be involved in the arms industry. These decisions and discussions are not taking place at an honest level within the Member States, and especially within the neutral countries: the public is being misled. Here, in this Parliament today, it was quite clear and most people were quite honest about it: they want a European defence identity, they want a competitive European arms industry and they want a European army; but the public in the Member States has not actually been consulted."@en1
lpv:spokenAs	member; G/EFA (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 member; PECH (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 unknown; Green Party (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 member; Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 member; Delegation for relations with the Member States of ASEAN, South-east Asia and the Republic of Korea (1999-09-28--2002-01-14)3 substitute; Committee on Foreign Affairs, Human Rights, Common Security and Defence Policy (1999-07-22--2002-01-14)3
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata	"McKenna (Greens/ALE )."1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph