Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-06-08-Speech-3-172"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2005-06-08"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Reform of the UN2
dcterms:Language	"sv"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20050608.16.3-172"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2005-06-08-Speech-3-1732
lpv:speaker	lp:Hélène Goudin2
lpv:spokenAs	member; IND/DEM (2004-07-20--2007-06-12)3 substitute; ENVI (2004-07-21--2007-01-14)3 unknown; Junilistan (2004-07-20--2009-07-13)3 member; DEVE (2004-07-21--2007-01-14)3 vice-chair; Delegation to the ACP-EU Joint Parliamentary Assembly (2004-09-15--2009-07-13)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, the EU Member States have different views on how the UN system should be reformed. Allow the Member States to discuss this matter with other UN members. This debate should not be conducted within the framework of EU cooperation but in a broader international context. It is clear that an EU strategy for reforming the UN system is largely aimed at safeguarding European, rather than global, interests. The motion for a resolution points out that the objective is that the EU countries should in the long run speak with a single voice in the Security Council. We are unsympathetic to this proposal. Clearly, the countries of Europe have different foreign policy positions. This emerged, in particular, in connection with the Iraq war. France and Great Britain are examples of countries that often have different approaches to foreign policy issues. Would it be at all possible to speak with a single European voice in the Security Council? Would the voices of small countries, such as Sweden, be heard at all?"@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph