Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2004-09-16-Speech-4-042"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20040916.2.4-042"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, as Mrs Doyle has just said when putting our written question to the Commission, this position statement affects not only the 25 Member States of the European Union, but is also a signal to the remainder of the 166 states that have signed up to CITES, known also as the Washington Agreement on the Protection of Species. That is what makes it important that we in this House should send out a clear signal. At present, the Agreement on the Protection of Species applies to some 30 000 species. We know that, beside the destruction of their habitats, international trade is the greatest threat to the survival of many endangered species. That is what makes CITES necessary, and that is why I have been heartened by many of the positions taken by the Commission, which, at the conference of states party to the Convention, is speaking out loud and clear in favour of strict restrictions on trade.
Mrs Korhola said that she sees it as being very, very important that all decisions should be founded on the precautionary principle. Discussion of this oral question, and also of today’s resolution, has been dominated by two issues, one being the protection of minke whales and the other the trade in ivory. It is no secret that Japan wants to reintroduce commercial whaling and is working towards it. It did not manage to get its position accepted at the last meeting of the International Whaling Commission in July 2004.
We call on the European Union and its Member States to reject Japan’s demand that three types of minke whales be transferred from Appendix I to Appendix II and hence also to unambiguously retain a higher standard of protection for the whales.
This resolution constitutes a clear demonstration by this House that we welcome the call by Kenya and other African states for the introduction of a 20-year moratorium on trade in ivory. Between 1980 and 1989, the number of African elephants dropped dramatically, from 1.2 million to 600 000 and halved again by 2001 to 300 000, a rapid decline explained largely by the demand for ivory. The former system of quotas for ivory exports from specified countries did not work, as demand is so great that enormous quantities are smuggled out illegally. For consumers and for those who monitor the trade, the situation is highly confusing, but it is a very agreeable one for those who want to smuggle ivory illegally. Over and over again, ivory is seized at our European airports because the documentation does not conform to what is required under the Agreement on the Protection of Species. Supplying, with intent to deceive, false information on customs declarations and CITES approval forms is widespread in the illegal trade in wild animals.
Yesterday, we also started considering the issue of African lions. My group wants item 7, as it stands in the resolution, to be retained. It is clear from the information we have about the threat to the African lion that there has been a dramatic reduction in their numbers over recent years, and so I am very glad to see the Commission take up a clear position on the subject."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples