Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2009-02-03-Speech-2-414"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20090203.22.2-414"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"− These are both quite specific questions. Again, I must underline the basic position that these negotiations must be the same as has been the case with other Member States.
But, of course, Iceland has a population just under 300 000, so it is small and would not be a big burden on the European economy. I think that the basic idea is that it would make a contribution, so it is an economy that can overcome the current difficulties.
I think that the Member States will watch it very carefully and will ask it first to put its house in order. That is the first requirement, and then there can be the question of the contribution Iceland can make to the Union’s economy.
Concerning the fisheries agreement, again, this is a very specific question. However, I seem to remember that this issue was mentioned several times in previous enlargement negotiations.
I think that the fisheries question will be the most complicated in negotiating with Iceland, because it has quite big privileges which will definitely be contested by certain Member States. I think this will be the key element in future negotiations.
I do not know to what extent the existing agreement is applicable or suitable for future relations between Iceland and other EU Member States. Being on that committee, however, you will know that this was a very hot topic in negotiations between Norway and some Member States. However, I think that, at least today, nobody can say exactly what promises or preoccupations there will be in this particular area."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata | |
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples