Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-06-13-Speech-2-060"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20060613.6.2-060"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, I should like to join in thanking Mr Buzek and start with a very positive anecdote about the European Research Framework Programme. At the beginning of the debate in committee, I brought together representatives of all the universities and of the business community in my region, in order to discuss the framework programme with them. This discussion naturally also brought to light criticism relating to bureaucracy and to SMEs having insufficient access to the framework programme. After a great deal of criticism had been expressed, a professor who had been involved in the framework programme for years spoke up, saying that we should not look at only the negative points: the Americans envied us this instrument.
Although things are by no means perfect now, we should not run the framework programme down. The report by Mr Buzek addresses many of the criticisms. Good proposals have been made in the fields of SMEs and bureaucracy, which we should support in plenary. I consider this a good report on the whole, but there is one point with which I am not in agreement – and this will not surprise you. I do not support Amendment 66 to Article 6. This Amendment calls for EU funding for research that includes destructive research with human embryos. This has been banned at national level in ten countries, in some cases following very intensive discussions, in some cases following a referendum.
The amendment also includes a revision clause. If this revision clause takes effect, cloning for research purposes could also be possible in the course of the framework programme – yet this is permitted in only three countries of the EU. After all, it is not the case that there is too much money within the framework programme – many good, uncontroversial projects are being rejected.
Since the subject of Alzheimer’s disease has been mentioned, I can say that, a few weeks ago, a meeting was held with the leading European researcher in the field of Alzheimer’s. He said that he had many innovative approaches to combating Alzheimer’s – but did not mention embryonic stem cell research as being one of them. For this reason, we should support the alternatives, but supporting Amendment 66 would mean that certain alternatives could not be promoted. For this reason, I ask you to reject Amendment 66."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples