Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-03-02-Speech-4-043"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2000-03-02"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:EC-Israel trade agreement2
dcterms:Language	"de"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20000302.3.4-043"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2000-03-02-Speech-4-0442
lpv:speaker	lp:Michael Gahler2
lpv:spokenAs	substitute; Committee on Development and Cooperation (1999-09-01--2002-01-14)3 unknown; Christlich Demokratische Union Deutschlands (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 member; EPP-ED (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 vice-chair; Delegation to the EU-Lithuania Joint Parliamentary Committee (1999-10-07--2002-01-14)3 member; Committee on Foreign Affairs, Human Rights, Common Security and Defence Policy (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, we are all agreed on the legal position and the commitments arising from this for Israel, as we are on the fact that irregularities have occurred. We have urged Israel to exercise supervision accordingly. The Commission is in touch with Israel about this and the Commissioner has made a statement on this. According to the information I have received, however, there are no serious cases at present, and we are only talking small amounts in the context of the total volume of trade. What should our policy be? I will start at the end and work back. Surely it should be our common goal, once the internationally-recognised State of Palestine is in place, for there to be an agreement between the State of Palestine and the EU which is identical in content to that between Israel and the EU. This would constitute an important and practical contribution on our part towards facilitating cooperation between Israel and its immediate environs. Therefore it does not make sense, and benefits no one, to break up evolved interweavings in the infrastructure, in the labour market and in the marketing structures. The Commission has not stirred up the matter for good reason. We do not need any more secondary theatres of war in this complicated peace process. Therefore, in my view, all existing agreements and practices should be respected by all parties in a transition period. This is something that is best left to the main protagonists – Israel and the Palestinian autonomous authorities – to sort out amongst themselves, with an appropriate amount of good will. One of the implications of this is that Israel must stop ignoring and blocking the interim agreement between the EU and the Palestinian autonomous authorities. But I also have an appeal to make to the critics of the Israelis’ former practice: what good does it do a Palestinian, if his Israeli employer, who grows a few oranges in the Gaza Strip or on the Left Bank, shuts up shop there and goes back into the heartland? None at all! He is out of a job. At the end of the day, the only people to profit from this on all sides are those who are not interested in reconciliation between Israelis and Palestinians, rather they have goals of their own which they seek to achieve by radicalising the situation. EU fruit producers might also stand to benefit indirectly. However, I assume this was not an ulterior motive for pushing the issue here in Parliament. Therefore, my advice to everyone is this: let us not break anything up during this transition period that we would have to rebuild at great expense further down the line."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph