Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2011-02-03-Speech-4-289-000"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20110203.25.4-289-000"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"The draft amendments that we put forward, and which the majority of Parliament turned down, summarise the reasons for our final vote against this resolution. The end of a dispute – commercial in this case – is not, in itself, a reason to rejoice. Obviously, everything depends on the way in which the dispute was resolved, who won and who lost through the final solution, and whether it is fair or unfair. That is what the majority of this Parliament seems to ignore. The end of this dispute benefits the US multinationals in the sector, but penalises European and ACP producers, particularly the small and medium-sized ones.
The motion for a resolution recognises it, not without some hypocrisy, since those who are proposing it are the same ones who approved the agreement that is causing the negative effects mentioned; the same ones who now express pious concerns about these effects, but who made them possible with their vote; the same ones who are demanding an impact assessment of the agreement, but who are not waiting for the results of this assessment to endorse it; the same ones who are now calling for respect for the Decent Work Agenda of the International Labour Organisation (ILO), but who tune blindly to the World Trade Organisation (WTO) tuning fork and close their eyes to the reports of violations of human rights by US multinationals in the countries of Latin America."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples