Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-11-16-Speech-3-330"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2005-11-16"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Arms exports2
dcterms:Language	"de"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20051116.21.3-330"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2005-11-16-Speech-3-3312
lpv:speaker	lp:Andreas Schwab2
lpv:spokenAs	member; EPP-ED (2004-07-20--2009-07-13)3 substitute; Delegation to the Euro-Mediterranean Parliamentary Assembly (2004-09-15--2009-07-13)3 member; Delegation to the ACP-EU Joint Parliamentary Assembly (2004-09-15--2006-01-18)3 member; PETI (2004-07-21--2007-01-14)3 substitute; Delegation for relations with Switzerland, Iceland and Norway and to the European Economic Area (EEA) Joint Parliamentary Committee (2004-09-15--2009-07-13)3 member; IMCO (2004-07-21--2007-01-14)3 substitute; ECON (2004-07-22--2007-01-14)3 unknown; Christlich Demokratische Union Deutschlands (2004-07-20--2009-07-13)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, at this late hour, we are debating whether we need military technology in Europe, and what we can do to bring about a European common foreign and security policy. First of all, on the subject of something my fellow Members on the other side of the House have called into question, I should like to say – and in so doing explicitly agree with my colleague Mr Brok – that the reason that the European Union needs military technology is that we Europeans cannot be dependent on third parties or leave ourselves open to blackmail when it comes to our security. Some fellow Members have also mentioned that the European public expects increased common action among the Member States in the field of foreign and security policy. There have already been a few successes in this regard: the mission in Bosnia mentioned earlier is only one of many accomplishments. However, if we are quite honest, we have to say that there is still a long way to go before we have a genuinely common foreign and security policy such as that envisaged by the public. That is why I expressly welcome the fact that the Commission’s proposal in the form of its Green Paper on the Defence Equipment Market, and the report by my colleague Mr Wuermeling, point in the right direction. Through the common rules for procuring military defence equipment, they oblige the Member States to take an important step towards the development of common defence structures and towards stronger political integration. The increased efficiency that will result with regard to the considerable expenditure on defence will automatically produce further unification of the European market and thus explicitly benefit the taxpayer. I should like to express some views on the form this common code of conduct could take. Back in 1958, the Commission developed materials and regulations that could be used as a basis for shaping Article 296. Unfortunately, to date these have never been published or used, but it would certainly be worth having a look at what was considered important at that time. The creation of a code of conduct must ensure that decisions by the European Armaments Agency on the one hand and the Commission on the other do not contradict each other. In this regard, the achievement of optimum coordination between the Commission and the European Defence Agency should be ensured."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph