Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-01-16-Speech-4-017"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2003-01-16"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:EBRD activities2
dcterms:Language	"de"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20030116.1.4-017"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2003-01-16-Speech-4-0182
lpv:speaker	lp:Elisabeth Schroedter2
lpv:spokenAs	unknown; Bündnis 90/die Grünen (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 substitute; Committee on Regional Policy, Transport and Tourism (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3 member; G/EFA (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 vice-chair; Delegation to the EU-Ukraine and the EU-Moldova Parliamentary Cooperation Committees and Delegation for relations with Belarus (2002-02-07--2004-07-19)3 substitute; Delegation to the EU-Poland Joint Parliamentary Committee (2002-02-06--2004-04-30)3 member; Committee on Foreign Affairs, Human Rights, Common Security and Defence Policy (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, Commissioner, Mr Lemierre, ladies and gentlemen, I cannot add my voice to the praise heaped on the Bank by the rapporteur and the previous speakers. It is not the task of parliamentarians to pay tribute to banks' investment successes but to check whether this Bank, which is funded from the public purse, complies with the political rules in force in the European Union, namely the rules of transparency, the rules of sustainable development, and the rules of environmental compatibility. It is our task to demand that it does so. This brings me to my points of criticism. Point 1: the support for investment in the BP pipeline for oil exploitation in the Caspian Sea. This, as everyone knows, is not necessarily intended to end hostilities in this region and bring peace. On the contrary, more than one million people have become refugees here over the last ten years. Admittedly, this is not an accusation that can be levelled at the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development itself, but the Bank does have a commitment to political principles. The fact is that this project will not produce a peace agreement, but will simply let the conflict in the region simmer on. In effect, that means that the European Union will benefit substantially from the production of oil, but for local people, it will not create the desired peace or prosperity. It is also unclear who bears the risk in the event of accidents. There are certainly no opportunities for local economic development. Transparency, too, must also be improved, especially transparency for the population. The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development is supporting dubious nuclear projects in Rovno and Khmelnitsky. We know that the European Parliament has spoken out against this, because it is not convinced that these reactors can be made safe. We also know that they are being built solely to supply cheap electricity to Western Europe, not to resolve the problems in Ukraine. This House has therefore opposed any such investment. I would therefore like to ask the President how, in that case, the Development Bank has still transferred EUR two billion to EURATOM to make these projects possible."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph