Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-03-30-Speech-4-096"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2000-03-30"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Vote2
dcterms:Language	"de"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20000330.4.4-096"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2000-03-30-Speech-4-0972
lpv:speaker	lp:Hiltrud Breyer2
lpv:spokenAs	member; Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 substitute; Committee on Legal Affairs and the Internal Market (1999-07-22--2002-01-14)3 substitute; Committee on Women's Rights and Equal Opportunities (1999-07-22--2002-01-14)3 unknown; Bündnis 90/die Grünen (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 member; G/EFA (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)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
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, we agreed with many points in the motion for a resolution, for example with the proposal that the European Parliament should submit a complaint to the Patent Office, but also with the criticism of the structures of the European Patent Office. However, we were very divided when it came to the vote. I, for example, voted for the resolution because, for me, it sent out important signals concerning human dignity. Many in the group – quite rightly, too, I think – abstained from voting because most of the amendments of the Group of the European People’s Party were adopted. I think it was the wish of the Group of the European People’s Party to attempt to transform this motion for a resolution into an advert for the patenting directive. They did not succeed, but they have nonetheless weakened the resolution. However, I am confident that the European Parliament will stop deceiving itself before long, by which I mean deceiving itself that the directive on patenting prohibits the patenting of human genes or parts of the human genetic make-up. That is unfortunately not the case. There is absolutely no point in burying one’s head in the sand and always maintaining the opposite of what is in fact the case, on the principle that the more you insist on something, the closer it comes to becoming a reality. Contrary to what Parliament believes, this patent is no isolated case. For years, the European Parliament has not patented human genes where they originate, in the body. However, the patenting of human genes and parts of the human genetic make-up still goes on. This is an affront to human dignity and also signifies a commercialisation of the human body. I was delighted to see that both the European and the German federations of medical practitioners are so clear-sighted about the fact and have also warned that research might be impeded by the patenting of genes. It is also nonsense and self-deluding to maintain that the directive on patenting would prohibit this. I think this very case has shown that we need to revise the directive on patenting and that, above all, we need a moratorium on the patenting of human genes and parts of the human genetic make-up, for I believe that, with the granting of the present patent, the ethical and social consequences have become more than clear."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph