Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-06-03-Speech-2-298"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2003-06-03"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Transboundary movement of GMOs2
dcterms:Language	"sv"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20030603.8.2-298"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2003-06-03-Speech-2-2992
lpv:speaker	lp:Jonas Sjöstedt2
lpv:spokenAs	unknown; Vänsterpartiet (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 substitute; CONT (2002-03-21--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 substitute; Delegation to the European Economic Area Joint Parliamentary Committee (EEA) (2002-02-07--2004-07-19)3 vice-chair; Delegation to the EU-Lithuania Joint Parliamentary Committee (2002-02-07--2004-04-30)3 member; Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3 member; EUL/NGL (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3
lpv:translated text	". Thank you, Mr President. When the Cartagena Protocol was successfully negotiated in 2000, this was a significant success for the European Union. It was also a success for all those of us who want free trade to be conducted in the context of environmental concern and respect for consumers. The protocol clarifies the conditions for global trade involving genetically-modified products. To date, 49 countries have ratified the protocol. It is only necessary for one country to ratify the protocol for it to come into force. The draft law we are now to debate lays down EU rules for the export of genetically-modified organisms. In adopting these rules, the European Union fulfils the requirements laid down in the Cartagena Protocol. These new rules are coming at precisely the right time, and they may perhaps also serve as a model and inspiration for states that are working on their regulations right now. Compared with the proposal tabled by the Commission, the rules we are to adopt tomorrow are a little stricter and clearer. They are more in line with what is laid down in the protocol and, in certain areas, go still further. In Parliament, we have focused on tightening up the proposal in certain key areas. We have made sure that rules and definitions shall not be looser than what is laid down by the protocol and that express approval by the country of import shall always be required before the export takes place. The draft law now makes this crystal-clear, explaining that the absence of a response from the country of import may never be viewed as ‘silent consent’. The legislation of the country of import must always be respected. The proposal makes it clear that we must not export anything from the EU that is not permitted within the EU and that there must be considerable transparency, with the public being given information about the export taking place. The proposal also makes it plain that responsibilities must be clearly distributed so that it is the actual exporter who gives notice of the export. Overall, the text we are now to adopt means that the European Parliament has obtained a hearing for approximately 80% of what we wanted to get through at first reading. We have also discussed this proposal with the Council of Ministers. COREPER has already adopted the text we are to adopt tomorrow. In this way, we can avoid conciliation, and the legislation will be ready when the protocol comes into force globally. That has been possible thanks to a significant consensus between the Council of Ministers and Parliament. There has also been a clear willingness to compromise and a shared desire on the part of the political groups to work quickly. This has happened following constructive cooperation with the shadow rapporteurs, whom I would thank, one and all. We have also had very close cooperation firstly with the Danish and then with the Greek Presidencies. They too deserve thanks, and the same applies to those with responsibility at the Commission’s Environment Directorate-General, who have been of very great help. By adopting these rules, we show that environmental considerations and respect for developing countries’ legislation are key concepts for the EU’s view of the global trade in genetically-modified products. There is a need to do this at the very time when the United States is pushing for issues of this kind to be resolved within the World Trade Organisation. We have recently seen examples of how this country has dumped genetically-modified food in countries that do not permit such food in their own national legislation. This shows very clearly how important it is for the EU to adopt rules right now that indicate a more responsible, credible and long-term approach to these complex and very controversial issues."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph