Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2010-01-20-Speech-3-198"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20100120.15.3-198"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Mr President, I support the environmental goals for 2020, but I have some serious doubts about some methods. The Copenhagen conference was a good example of a bad method. And what were the lessons?
The conference was too massive to be productive: a rock concert of 50 000 people is possible; a meeting, not. Secondly, Europe was outfoxed by China and India, and the US joined in. Instead of being a decisive player, the EU was a confused spectator.
What should we do? I think we have to reassess the form we used, rather a G20 than an event of Woodstock proportions. Secondly, we have to stop displaying moral arrogance by telling China and India what to do. Important barriers to punish both countries would be disastrous. On the contrary, the EU should re-examine its own stance, which will ultimately undermine our own growth and employment.
Finally, we need serious research on the body of evidence. ‘Climategate’ was already a reminder, and the claim that the Himalayan glaciers are retreating now seems to be based on speculation. Some members of the IPCC now even predict global cooling.
We need objective, impartial scientific research, and not an agenda-driven political activism. What is true and what is not: at present, we simply do not know, and I think we need to have the facts right, first. Commissioner, Minister, I hope you will look at these questions with an open mind."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata | |
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples