Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-05-03-Speech-4-125"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2001-05-03"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Vote2
dcterms:Language	"fr"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20010503.5.4-125"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2001-05-03-Speech-4-1262
lpv:speaker	lp:Gérard Caudron2
lpv:spokenAs	member; Delegation to the EU-Poland Joint Parliamentary Committee (1999-10-06--2002-01-14)3 unknown; Parti socialiste (1999-07-20--2002-07-09)3 member; Temporary committee on human genetics and other new technologies in modern medicine (2000-12-13--2001-11-29)3 member; Committee on Industry, External Trade, Research and Energy (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 substitute; Delegation to the EU-Cyprus Joint Parliamentary Committee (1999-10-08--2002-01-14)3 substitute; Committee on Foreign Affairs, Human Rights, Common Security and Defence Policy (1999-07-22--2002-01-14)3 member_of_the_bureau; PES (1999-07-20--2002-01-16)3 substitute; Temporary committee on the Echelon interception system (2000-07-06--2001-09-05)3
lpv:translated text	". The own-initiative report that we have been discussing today seeks to persuade the European Commission to “give an EU research initiative on the next generation Internet and new communications infrastructure (and associated electronic communications) a high priority in the 6th Framework research strategy”. As rapporteur on this subject, I had an obligation to speak and I wished to emphasise that the European Commission’s proposal on the new FPRTD has taken account of this requirement, since the second priority, of the 7+1 priorities, focuses on technologies for the Information Society. It was clear that a sector that represented such considerable progress would be given a prominent place in this multi-annual programme. I largely approve of the report’s requests, whilst at the same time deploring their excessively liberal tone. The rapporteur often forgets that these new technologies must exist, first and foremost, to serve the public. He is right to say that EU and Member State resources should focus on pre-competitive projects, with the objective of ensuring a powerful EU presence in the global development of next generation Internet and new communications infrastructures reinforcing the EU's role in Internet governance. In this context, I would point out that our Parliament voted, in the part-session of March 2001, for the Carraro report, which focused on the place that the Member States and the European Union should occupy within ICANN [the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers] – a private, non-profit company that has produced several key Internet systems – and which recommends opening up this system to developing countries. I am delighted that the Harbour report takes up these two points again. Like Mr Harbour, I support the strategy of seeking to promote the 'centres of excellence' referred to in the Commission’s proposals for creating a European research area, even if, I repeat, this concept needs to be clarified. I think it is a good idea that one of these centres should specialise in electronic communication, but we have not yet reached that point! With regard to the rapid creation of a super fast trans-European research network with a capacity of 100 gigabytes per second, this is, of course, an essential prerequisite to achieving an economy that is competitive, dynamic and knowledge-based, as defined in Lisbon. I shall take this opportunity to repeat insist on the fact that super fast Internet must benefit all strata of society. This is what I would have liked to see in my report on Universal Service and the new communications networks. Unfortunately, my amendments on this subject were rejected, largely at the behest of Mr Harbour!"@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph