Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-09-24-Speech-2-017"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20020924.2.2-017"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, our group fully supports the report by Mr Sjöstedt. My speech will focus on what we believe to be the most important aspects.
The report proposes stricter control of the transboundary movements of genetically modified organisms, not in order to distort trade – as has been said here – but in order to preserve biodiversity, the health of the population and the citizens’ right to choose.
It also proposes that the principle of caution be duly applied – and it is not always applied as it should be – and the cooperation of the Commission and the Member States with those third countries that do not offer a sufficient guarantee to be able to decide. The report supports international regulations and measures which are stricter in terms of responsibility and compensation for possible damages. It will not be possible to export genetically modified organisms unless there is written agreement from the receiving countries.
There is an issue which we know is controversial and which is going to cause difficulties: the export to third-world countries of genetically modified organisms which are not accepted in the European Union. We had this same problem last year with the Directive on the marketing of safe products, or unsafe products, when the amendment we requested to prevent the exportation of organisms or products to the third world which are not accepted in the European Union was not approved. I believe it is morally unacceptable that genetically modified organisms which are not accepted in the European Union can be exported to the third world.
We are asking for a restriction of confidential information, we demand more transparency in order to respect the citizens’ need for information.
There are certain amendments – as Mr Sjöstedt has said – which have been signed by three political groups in this House, which we support in particular, but I am going to refer to Amendment No 54, which we feel is important since we are in contact, above all, with the people of Latin America, and which relates to the socio-economic aspects resulting from the effects of genetically modified organisms on the protection of biological diversity and their impact on indigenous and local communities. Recently, in this very House, indigenous Mapuches from Chile defended this very notion, diversity. We cannot endanger it through exports – which are dangerous from a health point of view – of any genetically modified organisms which we do not accept here.
Mr President, we believe that the report by Mr Sjöstedt does not have any interest behind it, either economic or from any particular lobby, other than the defence of health, of biodiversity and the citizens’ right to choose. Since we were not able to prevent the more or less uncontrolled proliferation of genetically modified organisms, let us make the control of this cross-border movement and respect for the Cartagena Protocol a message from this Parliament to those people."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples