Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2012-07-03-Speech-2-522-000"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20120703.21.2-522-000"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Mr President, I think we have had a very good debate both here inside the Chamber and a parallel debate taking place on Twitter, which has been very highly informed.
I think there has been one misunderstanding in the debate, which is the role of the Commission here. I think people, particularly outside this House, have to understand that the Commission not only has the right, but has the duty to defend its proposal and has a duty to advocate its proposal, and that with the way the institutional triangle works, it is then up to Parliament and the Council to accept or reject the Commission’s position, and that is where we are now.
The one thing that is worrying me about this debate is the presumption on some benches that if you listen to ordinary citizens, you are being populist. But if you give in to the big commercial lobbies, you are being responsive. That is not a distinction that I can accept.
There are two demographics that I have found who have been opposed. There has been general opposition to ACTA, but two demographics in particular have expressed concern about ACTA. The under-25s who regard the Internet as a zone of freedom and an open area for expression, and I do not think ACTA has successfully reflected their concerns. Interestingly, the other demographic has been people from central and eastern Europe who know what it is to have their freedoms curtailed and have expressed great concern about the way ACTA might be implemented. So I understand where the people have come from on this issue and I think we are absolutely right as a Parliament to respond to that.
I also take from this debate though, both on the Internet and in this room, that there is no one who really opposes the idea that rights holders should get a decent reward for their efforts. What they object to is, perhaps, overreaching the proper definition of reward and curtailing freedom in providing that reward. What we have to strive for now, both as a Commission and as a Parliament, is the balance between ensuring that rights holders do get a return for their investment, for their effort, whilst maintaining Internet freedom. That is the challenge we all face in the weeks and months ahead."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata | |
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples