Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2009-10-07-Speech-3-180"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2009-10-07"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Situation in Guinea (debate)2
dcterms:Language	"sv"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20091007.18.3-180"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2009-10-07-Speech-3-1812
lpv:speaker	lp:Isabella Lövin2
lpv:spokenAs	member; Delegation for relations with the Pan-African Parliament (2009-09-16--2012-02-12)3 unknown; Miljöpartiet de gröna (2009-07-14--2014-06-30)3 member; PECH (2009-07-16--2012-01-18)3 member; G/EFA (2009-07-14--2014-06-30)3 substitute; DEVE (2009-07-16--2012-01-18)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, Mrs Malmström, ladies and gentlemen, I am a member of the Committee on Fisheries and I visited Guinea myself last December, so I have followed this matter very closely. First of all, I find it remarkable that the European Union is maintaining its fisheries agreement with Guinea, as the agreement was entered into with the previous regime two weeks before the coup. We have, in fact, stuck to an agreement that we entered into with a lawful regime, but now there is a military dictatorship. We have stuck to this all year. Yesterday, the US Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, openly urged Moussa Dadis Camara and his regime to step down. I can only agree with this minimum demand and would also like to point out that it would be a disgrace for the European Parliament if, in two weeks’ time, we were to vote in favour of a fisheries agreement with Guinea that would provide this regime with more than EUR 1 million at the end of November. The fisheries agreement relates to tuna fishing for 25 European boats. I believe that these boats will quite clearly have to look for other waters to fish in, because the EU cannot do business with dictatorships that slaughter their own people openly on the streets. The argument put to the Committee on Development and the Committee on Fisheries by the Commission that the money from the fisheries agreement will benefit the people is completely wrong. It reflects the Commission’s evaluation of the previous agreement. We have no idea where the money from these fisheries agreements will end up. They related to the previous regime. I hardly think it likely that the present regime will use the money better. I wonder, therefore, what the Council is intending to do about the fisheries agreement. Does the EU intend to join with the US and demand that the regime steps down?"@en1
lpv:videoURI	<go to Events_and_structure europarl>2

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph