Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-01-12-Speech-3-173"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20050112.9.3-173"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, there was a good response from the Commission, given the organisation for providing emergency aid that we have at present, but the disaster gives much cause for reflection. A lot could have been done differently, both at EU level and in those countries mainly affected.
Historically, the problem is that, generally speaking, too little attention has been given to the readiness to respond to disasters. It is relatively simple to mobilise large amounts of money both from the general public and from governments in an emergency situation. It is difficult obtaining resources for preventing disasters and preparing to respond to them. It has, for example, been known for a long time that the countries around the Indian Ocean had no system of warnings against not only tsunamis but also other major disasters, especially cyclones. Nothing has been done by the governments concerned or by various donors. The only country in the area that has acted upon the risks and prepared itself effectively is, in actual fact, Bangladesh.
In the same way, the EU civil crisis force that is now being discussed could already have been established. This is not the first time that the need for such a force has become apparent. EU activity should be more coordinated specifically in this area. Coordination and cooperation are required not only in order to set up this force but also in order to organise all the relief consignments in an emergency situation. There is a lack of coordination in this area. The UN has the main responsibility, but we know that the UN does not have the required capacity. A far better coordinated EU – and I am talking here about the Commission and the Member States – could have been of great help at the height of the disaster. That is something we must pin our hopes on for the future.
Finally, the reconstruction. Just like a number of other speakers, I should like to see the EUR 350 million talked about by Mr Barroso this morning take the form of fresh money rather than be extracted from the ordinary budget. If rapidity of response requires the use of already appropriated resources, we should ensure that these are subsequently and appropriately replenished. Otherwise, Asia will, as a region, miss out on EUR 150 million in development aid.
Finally, I would direct my last point to the Commission. Examine seriously all the reports that show how badly the ecology of the area had been damaged prior to the disaster through misdirected exploitation. In the reconstruction, it is vitally important to take account of the environment if the necessary conditions of life are not to be further eroded and if the risk of further disasters is to be reduced."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples