Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2011-03-24-Speech-4-015-000"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2011-03-24"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:EU-US air transport agreement - EU-Canada air transport agreement - EU-Vietnam air services agreement (debate)2
dcterms:Language	"de"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20110324.4.4-015-000"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2011-03-24-Speech-4-016-0002
lpv:speaker	lp:Gesine Meissner2
lpv:spokenAs	substitute; FEMM (2010-11-25--2012-01-18)3 member; Delegation to the EU-Mexico Joint Parliamentary Committee (2009-09-16--2014-06-30)3 member; Delegation to the Euro-Latin American Parliamentary Assembly (2009-09-16--2014-06-30)3 member; ALDE (2009-07-14--2014-06-30)3 substitute; Delegation to the EU-Ukraine Parliamentary Cooperation Committee (2009-09-16--2012-12-16)3 substitute; Delegation to the Euronest Parliamentary Assembly (2009-09-16--2012-12-16)3 member; TRAN (2009-07-16--2012-01-18)3 unknown; Freie Demokratische Partei (2009-07-14--2014-06-30)3 substitute; EMPL (2009-07-16--2012-01-18)3
lpv:translated text	". Madam President, firstly I too would like to thank the rapporteur. We have already discussed the fact that, following the Treaty of Lisbon, Parliament now has the opportunity to vote in favour of air service agreements of this kind or to reject them. We cannot change the contents, but we can accept or oppose them. This does not always make things simple, but it is at least a new task, which we are taking very seriously. It makes sense to replace a number of different bilateral agreements with one standardised EU agreement. It is clear that there are no boundaries in airspace, which is a good way of explaining this. The European Union is also a strong economic community and so it is sensible to discuss agreements made by the EU with different third countries, which is what we are doing now. We have a number of very different agreements on the table today. I will start with Vietnam. This is the least complex agreement. It concerns different accesses and services and also safety regulations, but it is a relatively short agreement, which is why I am only mentioning it briefly. The most comprehensive agreement is the one with Canada. In this agreement it was not just a case of ensuring free access to air services which can be used in different ways, but also of covering issues such as the environment, safety and also market access and ownership. In that respect we have long since passed the first stage of 25% and already reached the second stage of 49% ownership of each other’s air services market. Now we are about to enter stages 3 and 4. In stage 3 it is possible to establish airlines in another country and another region. Stage 4 would allow a European airline to fly from A to B within Canada. We have not come nearly as far as this with the USA, despite the fact that we have been negotiating with the USA for a long time. I would like to make one more point. Mr Kallas said that we were all very much in support of this issue, but in the case of the USA our reaction is more restrained, because the agreement does not represent a true partnership. The USA wants to take more from us than it is prepared to give. We need to continue negotiating on this. Apart from this issue, we will vote in favour, because it is clear that progress has been made."@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