Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2004-09-16-Speech-4-045"
Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
---|---|
rdf:type | |
dcterms:Date | |
dcterms:Is Part Of | |
dcterms:Language | |
lpv:document identification number |
"en.20040916.2.4-045"2
|
lpv:hasSubsequent | |
lpv:speaker | |
lpv:spokenAs | |
lpv:translated text |
"Our group has also signed the motion for a resolution, and we think it is a very good resolution, all parts of which we support. I should, however, like the Commission to clarify the position to be adopted by the EU in these negotiations with regard to two points.
The first concerns the issue of secret ballots. There is now a debate about not having open votes with due reporting of the way in which countries vote on a number of positions. I think that, if it is to be possible to demand political accountability, it is absolutely crucial that countries be answerable for the way in which they vote on this convention. Can we rely upon the EU doing everything in its power to oppose the holding of secret ballots in these votes? That is my first question.
My second question is a special one concerning the protection of the great white shark. On this issue, there appears to be a consensus to the effect that a higher level of protection is required, but I believe that, given the uncertainties that exist concerning what stocks remain, the demand for a zero quota for export is extremely sensible on the grounds of the precautionary principle. I wonder if we can rely upon the EU also supporting the demand for a zero quota for export."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples