Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2011-04-04-Speech-1-079-000"

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	"sv"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20110404.15.1-079-000"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2011-04-04-Speech-1-080-0002
lpv:speaker	lp:Christofer Fjellner2
lpv:spokenAs	member; Delegation for relations with Belarus (2009-09-16--2014-06-30)3 member; INTA (2009-07-16--2012-01-18)3 member; EPP (2009-07-14--2012-02-02)3 substitute; Delegation for relations with Iran (2009-09-16--2014-06-30)3 substitute; Delegation to the Cariforum — EU Parliamentary Committee (2010-06-16--2014-06-30)3 member; Delegation to the Euronest Parliamentary Assembly (2009-09-16--2014-06-30)3 unknown; Moderata Samlingspartiet (2009-07-14--2014-06-30)3 substitute; ENVI (2009-07-16--2012-01-18)3 substitute; CONT (2009-07-16--2012-01-18)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, the number of products covered by this legislation that can be used for both civil and military purposes is far greater than we first thought. It includes everything from lorries to aeroplane jet engines and telecommunications equipment. I therefore think it is important to point out that the direct reference to the weapons industry in this regard is often misleading. It also makes this legislation important in terms of simplifying and harmonising the way in which we handle products in Europe that can be used for both civil and military purposes. It must be stringent, predictable and clear, but also harmonised. Every time I hear about a Swedish company that is denied the chance to export to another country for reasons relating to EU legislation, only to then discover that a French company, for example, is perfectly able to export the same products, it is clear that the EU has failed. We must remember that trade is essentially a good thing. I am thinking of telecommunications equipment, for example, which is incredibly important for democracy movements around the world. This proposal must not make civil trade more difficult and subject to more bureaucracy. I am therefore opposed to the proposal to introduce an ex ante declaration. Modern, just-in-time delivery systems, service agreements and so on make it extremely difficult for fully legitimate products that we want to export and see more of. Most companies know exactly what these products are. Even if they apply an ex post notification, they know that they will be penalised if they export anything. I think it is important to simplify trade. We need to ensure that the legislation is stringent, clear and harmonised, but also simple. This does not fit well with having an ex ante check of everything that is exported. For example, it makes it more difficult to send important telecommunications equipment to countries that need it."@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