Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2015-07-07-Speech-2-051-000"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20150707.4.2-051-000"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Mr President, I want to firstly join the many members who have already thanked Bernd Lange for his hard work on this report. There is a view in some quarters, inside and outside this House, that our handling of TTIP has not been our finest hour. I beg to differ. I think Parliament has fulfilled exactly the role that it should play. The rapporteur has performed a Herculean task in bringing together competing and sometimes contradictory views on a wide range of sensitive and emotive issues. In my view, and in the view of my Group, if this report is adopted by Parliament it will provide an excellent blueprint for a progressive TTIP that not only creates jobs but protects public services and the right to regulate, and defends labour and environmental standards. Even on the most sensitive issue – ISDS – we have made progress.
I and my group remain opposed to ISDS, but nevertheless, look how far we have come. Firstly, the vast majority of this Parliament, and indeed the Commission, now accept that the old-style ISDS is dead and unacceptable. The majority now accept that any investor protection must be transparent, must not limit the right to regulate, and must not undermine health, labour or environmental standards. That is indeed progress on where we were six months ago.
In this report we have also made it clear that the sustainable development chapter must be binding and enforceable. We have demanded that the US sign and ratify core ILO conventions on workers’ rights; with this report we are also demanding, very clearly and explicitly, the full exemption of public services from the deal, regardless of how they are financed – and, as the rapporteur has said, that includes healthcare, education and water.
We also acknowledge that TTIP is an opportunity to help set global standards. That does not mean (again, as others have said) simply accepting all US standards, and the report again makes it clear that GMOs, some food standards and chemicals are not up for grabs. Where we can agree, we should agree common standards with the United States, and again, as others have said, if we do not, it will be the global marketplace that sets those standards. Do we really believe that the human rights standards from Latin America, the labour standards from China, the environmental standards from other parts of Asia, will be up to our standards? Do we really want to be driven down by that part of the world when we could reach an agreement on common standards with the United States that – for all its faults – could drag it up the way, not down the way?
My group has been explicit since the outset of the TTIP debate that we want a good TTIP but that we are ready to reject a bad TTIP, and we stand by that position. But this report, if it is accepted by Parliament and implemented by the negotiators, would create a Europe that helps to create jobs but ensures that European standards on workers’ rights and the environment are at the heart of our economic growth strategy. Commissioner, my recommendation to you would be, if Parliament adopts this report tomorrow, make sure your chief negotiator keeps it in his top pocket and refers to it every day during the negotiations."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata | |
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples