Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2011-02-17-Speech-4-022-000"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2011-02-17"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:EU guarantee to the EIB against losses under loans and guarantees for projects outside the EU (debate)2
dcterms:Language	"pt"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20110217.4.4-022-000"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2011-02-17-Speech-4-023-0002
lpv:speaker	lp:Miguel Portas2
lpv:spokenAs	member_of_the_bureau; EUL/NGL (2009-07-14--2012-01-22)3 member; Delegation for relations with the Maghreb countries and the Arab Maghreb Union (2009-09-16--2012-04-24)3 substitute; Delegation for relations with Iran (2009-09-16--2012-04-24)3 vice-chair; Special Committee on the Financial, Economic and Social Crisis (2009-10-15--2011-07-31)3 substitute; Delegation for relations with the Mashreq countries (2009-09-16--2012-04-24)3 substitute; ECON (2009-07-16--2012-01-18)3 member; Special committee on the policy challenges and budgetary resources for a sustainable European Union after 2013 (2010-06-17--2011-06-30)3 unknown; Bloco de Esquerda (2009-07-14--2012-04-24)3 member; BUDG (2009-07-16--2012-01-18)3 member; Delegation for relations with Iraq (2009-09-16--2012-04-24)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, I believe that what we are discussing here today is both the extension and clarification of the mandate of the European Investment Bank (EIB) linked to a system of guarantees that are required for its financing operations. I believe that the extension or clarification of the mandate that is being proposed is along the right lines. It will enable the EIB better to meet its own goals regarding cooperation and development aid. As long as the EIB and the European Union wish to remain in thrall to credit rating agencies there will be a problem with guarantees; that much is clear. There are those who say that perhaps this increases the risk and that we should therefore be careful when we invest in health, in education, in combating poverty, and in the Millennium Development Goals, because none of those are particularly lucrative; something else needs to be said instead. What needs to be said is, let us discuss our relationship with credit rating agencies. Let us also discuss something else, right now: how is it possible to be so careful regarding the guarantees that the taxpayer would have to give for combating poverty, and so forgetful of the way in which the European Union did not try to regulate the private banks or prevent the financial crimes in which they have been involved for all these years, and which are now being paid for with millions of unemployed? That is actually how this question should be put. In any case, there is a problem, about which I have reservations. My reservations are very straightforward: firstly, we have a European Union that has been employing double standards in international politics. In fact, there is no reason, from a human rights point of view, why the EIB should be financing projects in Libya but not in Belarus. When it comes down to it, what are the criteria? We must be very clear about this because I also have reservations about a second issue: the European External Action Service has a very broad mandate, which includes military operations. My question is, do these aspects overlap, and how is it that the EIB cannot be easily diverted from its own goals and from the mandate for which it was created?"@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