Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-09-24-Speech-2-026"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2002-09-24"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Transboundary movement of GMOs2
dcterms:Language	"sv"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20020924.2.2-026"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2002-09-24-Speech-2-0272
lpv:speaker	lp:Inger Schörling2
lpv:spokenAs	member; Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy (2002-01-17--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) (2002-02-06--2004-07-19)3 member; G/EFA (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 unknown; Miljöpartiet (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 substitute; Committee on Development and Cooperation (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, I too wish to begin by thanking the Commission for its proposal and Mr Sjöstedt for his splendid and sterling work on confirming and clarifying what this matter is really about. The Cartagena Protocol is designed to create a framework for international trade involving GMOs. It is based on two important principles, firstly the precautionary principle and secondly the principle according to which countries that want stricter rules are entitled to have them. Certain speakers here today seem to believe that the Cartagena Protocol is something quite different, aimed at facilitating trade as much as possible. The Cartagena Protocol is, however, an agreement on biosafety. The precautionary principle must be the guiding principle. There is no other way. It is therefore crucial for the European Parliament to vote in favour of Amendment No 52, which is also supported by the rapporteur. This states that transboundary movement of genetically modified organisms should proceed ‘in every case and at each stage on the basis of the precautionary principle’. That is something we must not go and lose. My colleague, Mrs Evans addressed another important point, namely the ethic that permeates the Cartagena Protocol and that is based on the requirement for countries that do not want to produce or consume GMOs in any form to be entitled to refuse them. Aid consignments containing GMOs, as discussed at the Johannesburg Summit, must not take place. We must help bring about a situation in which no compulsion is felt to receive such consignments. Mrs Wallström explained that there is no doubt that the EU must fully comply with the Protocol. In this situation, I doubt if it would further the Cartagena Protocol if the European Parliament were to accept Amendment Nos 50 and 51, or if the content of these were to be complied with for, in that case, it would not be possible for the Protocol’s intentions to be put into practice. I therefore recommend that these amendments be rejected, for their purpose is to ensure that trade is impeded as little as possible. The reason that the Cartagena Protocol came about is that GMOs and trade require special precautionary measures. We can never have too much safety. On the other hand, we have too little. There must be no doubt that, in Community legislation, it is the precautionary principle that applies and that it applies in full. I support this report in its entirety."@en1
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata	"can"1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph