Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2011-04-04-Speech-1-073-000"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2011-04-04"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Dual-use items and technology (debate)2
dcterms:Language	"de"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20110404.15.1-073-000"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2011-04-04-Speech-1-074-0002
lpv:speaker	lp:Reinhard Bütikofer2
lpv:spokenAs	member; SEDE (2009-07-16--2012-01-18)3 substitute; Delegation for relations with the NATO Parliamentary Assembly (2011-01-17--2011-09-20)3 substitute; Delegation for relations with the People's Republic of China (2009-09-16--2013-10-09)3 substitute; AFET (2009-07-16--2012-01-18)3 member; ITRE (2009-07-16--2012-01-18)3 member; Delegation for relations with the United States (2009-09-16--2014-06-30)3 vice-chair; G/EFA (2009-07-14--2012-01-31)3 unknown; Bündnis 90/Die Grünen (2009-07-14--2014-06-30)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, Commissioner, before us we have a subject that affects trade and security to equal degrees. Dual-use items are products with two uses. That means that they can have both a civil use, as well as a perfectly sensible or downright dangerous, but in any case security-relevant, use. Some parties, for example, the German Federal Ministry of Economics and Technology, claim that these are – and I quote – ‘non-critical items’. That is incorrect. This Parliament has previously taken a more responsible position in its committees. I speak as rapporteur for the opinion of the Committee on Foreign Affairs and of the Subcommittee on Security and Defence. In these committees, we have taken a very clear position. We believe that it would be extremely negligent not to take certain control mechanisms into consideration. I would therefore like to appeal to my fellow Members to follow the recommendations of the Committee on Foreign Affairs and the Subcommittee on Security and Defence and, in particular, the recommendations of the rapporteur, who has just spoken, with regard to the question of ex ante control. This is the one major controversial issue that we still face with regard to this matter. To perform checks only after the event would result in less security. However, we want more security for EU citizens and also more security for our partner countries and trade partners. We do not want the principle of ex ante control – which the Committee on International Trade and the Committee on Foreign Affairs have followed – to now be replaced by the principle of ex post control. That would place trade interests above security interests. Many Member States, the Netherlands for example, have expressly warned against this. It would therefore undoubtedly be in the interests of our citizens for the plenary to confirm what the committees have drawn up."@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