Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2010-11-10-Speech-3-036"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2010-11-10"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Upcoming EU-US summit and Transatlantic Economic Council - EU-US Data Protection Agreement (debate)2
dcterms:Language	"de"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20101110.14.3-036"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2010-11-10-Speech-3-0372
lpv:speaker	lp:Hannes Swoboda2
lpv:spokenAs	vice-chair; S&D (2009-07-14--2012-01-16)3 substitute; Delegation to the EU-Ukraine Parliamentary Cooperation Committee (2009-09-16--2012-10-21)3 member; AFET (2009-07-16--2012-01-18)3 substitute; ITRE (2009-07-16--2012-01-18)3 member; Delegation for relations with the United States (2009-09-16--2013-04-14)3 substitute; SEDE (2009-07-16--2012-01-18)3 substitute; Special Committee on the Financial, Economic and Social Crisis (2009-10-08--2011-07-31)3 unknown; Sozialdemokratische Partei Österreichs (2009-07-14--2014-06-30)3 member; Delegation to the EU-Kazakhstan, EU-Kyrgyzstan and EU-Uzbekistan Parliamentary Cooperation Committees, and for relations with Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Mongolia (2009-09-16--2012-11-20)3 member; Delegation to the Euronest Parliamentary Assembly (2009-09-16--2012-03-13)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, I would like to add my very warm thanks to the Council and Commission for their introductory remarks. I would particularly like to concentrate on what Mr De Gucht said, because it needs to be noted that the US has changed since 2 November. Not that cooperation with the US was perfect before, but it must be feared that it will now be more difficult. You mentioned protectionism, Mr De Gucht. I believe that we must act jointly to counter protectionism. It may provide a solution for one area or another in the short term, but overall, it is no solution because it results in competitive protectionism that is quite definitely not in our interests. You referred to energy matters. Today, the Commission published a paper on energy – Energy 2020. While I would criticise some aspects of this, the thinking behind it is along the right lines. However, I cannot imagine that the US will publish a similar paper with similar guidelines. This area will be very difficult, and all the more so since 2 November. You also mentioned electric cars and the matter of developing smart grids jointly with the US, and these are indeed things that we should attempt. At the same time, however, we need to tell the US that we also have other partners. We can also try to develop similar things with China, Brazil or other countries. We need to give the Americans the impression that we are not necessarily reliant on them. We would like to do it with them, but they are not our only partner – particularly when it comes to climate change. Let us bear in mind the behaviour of the US and President Obama’s inability to act because laws had not yet been passed. Now, with the current majorities in Congress, the law is not even on the table – with the result that we must assume that things will be more difficult unless we succeed in taking some of these matters further with countries such as China, India or Brazil. We have to acknowledge this fact clearly. I will respond to Mr Brok’s comments by saying that initially, there was a great difference, but now there is less difference. It is absolutely right and vital, from our point of view, too, that the US goes back to balancing its budget. I have nothing against that; on the contrary, it is a good thing if the US tries to create new jobs again – good for America, and good for us. However, it needs to be done in a coordinated way. The Americans therefore need to get used to accepting greater global cooperation in this area too, particularly cooperation with Europe."@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