Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-10-25-Speech-4-161"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2001-10-25"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Fisheries and poverty reduction2
dcterms:Language	"es"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20011025.4.4-161"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2001-10-25-Speech-4-1622
lpv:speaker	lp:Miguel Angel Martínez Martínez2
lpv:spokenAs	member; PES (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 vice-chair; 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) (2001-02-15--2002-01-14)3 member; Committee on Development and Cooperation (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 unknown; Partido Socialista Obrero Español (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 substitute; Delegation to the EU-Poland Joint Parliamentary Committee (1999-10-08--2002-01-14)3 substitute; AGRI (1999-07-22--2002-01-14)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, at a meeting a few days ago of Portuguese and Spanish Socialists in Santiago de Compostela, we said that European Union policies must always be judged in terms of the added value they contribute in the field of social cohesion. We thereby insisted that our Union must be, amongst other things but, for us, essentially, a great framework for intra-European solidarity. Naturally, this approach also goes for the actions of the united Europe in its relations with other countries, in particular the developing countries. So the policies of the European Union relating to these countries must also be judged in terms of the added value they contribute in relation to social cohesion, in other words, in terms of their contribution to progress towards a more balanced world with fewer inequalities. Therefore, while agreeing with the excellent and – in my opinion – not utopian report by Mr Lannoye, and speaking for the Parliament’s Committee on Development and Cooperation, we Socialists believe that we must take this criterion into account in assessing our fisheries policies and the agreements with third countries which make up these policies. I will not say that these agreements must be seen fundamentally as instruments of our development cooperation policy. We understand that there are other legitimate objectives, including the defence of the interests of the fisheries sectors in the Member States of the Union. But we would say that this fisheries policy must not contradict what we do in the field of cooperation and, above all, it must not contradict, either in the immediate, medium or long terms, the priority strategic objective we have set in the field of development cooperation, that is, the eradication of poverty in the countries of the South. In summary, we aspire to a fisheries policy which is coherent with what we are doing in relation to development cooperation. A fisheries policy which, at least as a collateral effect, contributes to the eradication of poverty in the countries with which we sign agreements so that we may fish in their waters. As well as respecting our partners and their rights as owners of those waters, we must learn the necessary lessons from our experience, which led us to exhaust the fish stocks off our coasts. It would be intolerable to repeat the same mistake in the fishing grounds of people for whom fishing may provide resources which are important for their own future. This respect and coherence with our goal of sustainable development for all must prevent egotistical and conceited actions by us, and by others who, equally irresponsible, through fishing activity in the third world, brought to reality the Spanish saying which says that we ‘brought these people bread for today and hunger for tomorrow’."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph