Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-10-25-Speech-3-170"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2000-10-25"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Vote2
dcterms:Language	"fr"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20001025.6.3-170"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2000-10-25-Speech-3-1712
lpv:speaker	lp:Marie Anne Isler Béguin2
lpv:spokenAs	member; Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 unknown; Les Verts-Europe-Ecologie (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 member; Members from the European Parliament to the Joint Parliamentary Assembly of the Agreement between the African, Caribbean and Pacific States and the European Union (ACP-EU) (2000-10-05--2002-01-14)3 member; Delegations to the parliamentary cooperation committees for relations with Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia (1999-09-28--2002-01-14)3 member; G/EFA (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 substitute; Committee on Regional Policy, Transport and Tourism (1999-07-22--2002-01-14)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, Mrs Sudre’s report is indeed of great importance, and even capital importance for the outermost regions, but my group, the Group of the Greens/European Free Alliance, abstained and I should like to explain why. The problems raised by the report have been identified; there is no further need to go into the details. The Group of the Greens/European Free Alliance is disappointed, however, disappointed that the report did not seize the opportunity to bring about environmentally, socially and culturally sustainable development in these regions and that the amendments adopted during the vote are not such as to improve the text in that respect. We regret that the positions Parliament has adopted in the vote are the European Union’s positions concerning these regions. In particular, the Group of the Greens/European Free Alliance regrets the report’s rather defensive attitude to the ACP and candidate countries. The Group of the Greens/European Free Alliance is also opposed to granting permanent derogations. We are in favour of applying the principle of derogation to the common policies applied in the outermost regions on a case-by-case basis. I am thinking here of state aid and fiscal policies. We regret the fact that the call to moderate the ‘polluter pays’ principle was endorsed, for that could open the door to misuse in the application of this specific prerogative. We also regret the lack of any reference to, or even mention of, the need to protect biodiversity, which is one of the most important assets of the outermost regions. These regions could act as a wonderful laboratory in terms of sustainable development. That is another missed opportunity. On the other hand, we welcome the paragraphs in the report on promoting renewable energies and monitoring industrial activities which cause pollution."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph