Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2012-10-23-Speech-2-286-000"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2012-10-23"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Protocol to the Euro-Mediterranean Agreement establishing an association between the EC and Israel on Conformity Assessment and Acceptance of Industrial Products (CAA) (debate)2
dcterms:Language	"en"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20121023.17.2-286-000"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2012-10-23-Speech-2-287-0002
lpv:speaker	lp:David Martin2
lpv:spoken text	"Madam President, Daniel Caspary knows full well that he is not equating like with like. Firstly, the Palestinians are the occupied, not the occupiers. Secondly, the agricultural upgrade was relatively minor compared to the millions, if not billions, that could eventually be available to Israeli companies if we approve this so-called ‘technical upgrade’. It is not a ‘technical upgrade’. It will immediately benefit Israeli pharmaceutical companies. It is also not something being done in the interest of the European Union, Mrs Dodds, because there is no evidence that it would save the UK National Health Service a single penny. This is not the time, in my opinion, to be upgrading our relationship with Israel. If we believe in policy cohesion, we have to have some interaction between our trade policy, our human rights policy and our foreign policy. Mr Murphy has rightly said that Israel is engaged in the collective punishment of Gaza, against all human rights norms, against all international norms. There is no question about it; even the Israelis do not deny it. For the misdemeanours of a few, the whole of Gaza is being punished. We also know, of course, that Israel has continued to expand its settlements in the Middle East. These settlements are illegal under international law and threaten to make a two-state solution impossible. The EU has repeatedly urged the Israeli Government to immediately end all settlement activities on the West Bank, including in East Jerusalem, in line with its obligations under the roadmap. These are not my words, but those of the High Representative of the European Union. So how can the High Representative put out a press release like that, and the Trade Commissioner then come along and say we should approve the rewarding of Israel for its policies? There is no cohesion there, there is no logic to such a position in the European Union. Let me make it clear, and other speakers have made it clear: this is not about being anti-Israel. This is about being anti the current Israeli Government and anti the current Israeli Government’s policies. That is why initially I hoped to postpone a decision, so that if we do get a better Israeli Government, if we do get better Israeli policies, we could pass this protocol and we could enhance our relationship with Israel."@en1
lpv:spokenAs	member; Delegation for relations with the Korean Peninsula (2009-09-17--2014-06-30)3 member; INTA (2012-01-19--2014-06-30)3 member; AFCO (2012-01-19--2014-06-30)3 member; Delegation to the ACP-EU Joint Parliamentary Assembly (2009-09-16--2014-06-30)3 chair; Delegation to the Cariforum — EU Parliamentary Committee (2010-09-08--2014-06-30)3 unknown; Labour Party (2009-07-14--2014-06-30)3 member; S&D (2009-07-14--2014-06-30)3 member; DROI (2012-01-19--2014-06-30)3 member; Conference of Delegation Chairs (2010-09-08--2014-06-30)3
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata	"David Martin (S&D )."1
lpv:videoURI	<go to Events_and_structure europarl>2

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph