Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2009-10-21-Speech-3-022"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20091021.2.3-022"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, I think that the Chairman of the Group of the European People’s Party (Christian Democrats), Joseph Daul, and Mrs Harms have asked some very important questions.
So the United Kingdom has ratified the Lisbon Treaty and I hope that everybody – particularly the British Members – respects the British democratic system.
How can we ensure success at Copenhagen, especially when other partners are not making the same effort? In fact, there are difficulties, because there is a clear lack of ambition on the part of some developed countries in terms of a concrete commitment to reduce emissions. The largest economies in the developing countries are also unwilling to integrate their national plans for mitigation with the global agreement and, at the moment, there is no credible financial plan.
So, what do we do in this case?
Firstly, I believe this is not the time for Europe to rein in its ambition. That would provide an excuse for the negative elements not to make any effort. Consequently, it is our job to continue to demonstrate ambition and leadership but, at the same time, and here I am replying in concrete terms to Joseph Daul, to say that our offer, especially our financial offer, is a conditional one. We are prepared to help those countries which are making genuine efforts to reduce emissions. It is therefore important to make a conditional offer in financial terms, but to rein in our ambition would be a mistake.
I believe success is still possible in Copenhagen. There are also positive aspects. The United States has re-entered the negotiations. It should be recalled that a few years ago, the United States was not really participating in the process but they are now committed to the negotiations. It should also be recalled that Australia and Japan have announced ambitious goals – not yet in binding terms, certainly, but at a political level. Even China, Mexico, Brazil and South Korea have announced ambitious national plans but have not yet agreed to integrate them into a global agreement.
Let us, therefore, emphasise these positive aspects and create this dynamic and I hope that the European Council at the end of this month will not supply the sceptics and the Cassandras, who are already saying that we need a plan B, with ammunition. I have already said that there is no plan B, because there is no planet B. What we need to do is concentrate and not miss this historic opportunity afforded by Copenhagen.
My final point is to express my surprise. I would never have expected a British Member of this Parliament to question that great institution that is the British Parliament. One of the greatest contributions of Britain to civilisation was, and is, the British Parliament.
Let us be clear. The British Government has negotiated the Treaty. The British Government has signed the Treaty. The Parliament of Britain – the House of Commons and the House of Lords – have approved the Treaty. Her Majesty the Queen has ratified the Treaty. The instruments of ratification of the UK are deposited in Rome."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata | |
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples