Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-04-09-Speech-3-369"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2003-04-09"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Human tissues and cells2
dcterms:Language	"fr"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20030409.7.3-369"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2003-04-09-Speech-3-3702
lpv:speaker	lp:Didier Rod2
lpv:spokenAs	substitute; Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3,3 vice-president; 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) (2003-03-01--2004-07-19)3,3 unknown; Les Verts-Europe-Ecologie (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3,3 member; G/EFA (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3,3 member; Committee on Development and Cooperation (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3,3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, we welcome many of the points contained in Mr Liese’s report. In particular we support the amendments which seek to exclude from the scope of this directive tissues and cells originating from human embryos or genetic engineering, insofar as there is no European legislation defining the use of gene therapy. One compromise, however, is causing us problems, and that is the one concerning voluntary and non-remunerated donations of human tissues and cells. What we want is a guarantee that such donations will be unpaid. In order to achieve such a guarantee, it is necessary to define specifically, in this directive, the legitimate and acceptable level of compensation, which in our opinion is the reimbursement of travelling costs and income lost during the period required for the journey, the donation, and any rest period which is necessary, plus refreshments and that sort of allowance, but nothing more. Otherwise we shall be leaving the door open to compensation – or even remuneration – for such donations, with all the foreseeable abuses in terms of quality and safety, and the risks that would result for both donors and recipients. As the previous speaker said, bodies are not commercial goods. Our cells and tissues are not for sale. Another fundamental principle of this directive is that of anonymity, which must be compatible with the traceability of the tissues and cells. The proposal by the European Commission, enhanced by the amendments of the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy, has succeeded in taking both of these principles into account. The plenary session of this Parliament should not call into question this fragile equilibrium by adopting amendments seeking to remove anonymity from donors of gametes and therefore of sperm donations, or to make tissue and cell distribution records available to the public, and I am referring here to one amendment in particular. The transparency argument is ill-advised in this case. The need to trace tissues and cells destined for transplantation from the donor to the recipient should not work to the detriment of anonymity. That would be to leave the door open to abuses of an ethical, eugenic or even racial nature. Finally, we would ask the Commission, which did not want to include organs within the scope of this directive, to propose as a matter of urgency a specific text for establishing quality and safety standards in respect of organs. I believe that this report is a balanced one. We should continue to work in this direction, including during subsequent readings."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph