Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-12-14-Speech-4-073"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2000-12-14"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:VOTE2
dcterms:Language	"nl"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20001214.1.4-073"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2000-12-14-Speech-4-2272
lpv:speaker	lp:Bas Belder2
lpv:spokenAs	member; EDD (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 unknown; Staatkundig Gereformeerde Partij - Gereformeerd Politiek Verbond - Reformatorisch Politieke Federatie (1999-07-20--2002-03-17)3 member; Temporary committee on the Echelon interception system (2000-07-06--2001-09-05)3 member; Members from the European Parliament to the Joint Parliamentary Assembly of the Agreement between the African, Caribbean and Pacific States and the European Union (ACP-EU) (2000-10-05--2002-01-14)3 member; Committee on Foreign Affairs, Human Rights, Common Security and Defence Policy (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 vice-chair; Delegation for relations with the United States (1999-07-22--2002-01-14)3 substitute; Committee on Industry, External Trade, Research and Energy (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3
lpv:translated text	"The Gill report has not met with our support. The following observations have played a role in the outcome. In an economy where competition is cut-throat, digital information must be able to offer quality. When considering what can and must be offered in terms of digital content, the principle of technological neutrality forms part of the European policy – and rightly so. Accordingly, rules and regulations on printed information also apply to digital information. This aspect has not been sufficiently highlighted in the report. In this context, the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms forms a framework delineating the content for the sake of consumer protection. Pursuant to Article 10, freedom of expression goes hand in hand with duties and responsibilities which can result in conditions, restrictions and sanctions. In the light of this, regarding digital content, governments must, among other things, act in the interest of preventing criminal offences (discrimination), protecting public health (for example, provision of badly controlled medicines via the Internet), public decency or the rights of others (copyrights). We must avoid lending any support to content which goes against the said interests. The report fails to point this out. Secondly, the report takes an approach to linguistic and cultural diversity which is too negative. Amendment No 8 reduces these to barriers to industrial development. This is said to be in conflict with respect for national identity (Article 6(3) of the Treaty on European Union). Legislation is different in each Member State so as to accommodate this national identity in terms of society, language and ethics, for example. It would, therefore, be useful if the EU Member States were to ponder the question as to whose legislation should apply at European level. In accordance with the principle of subsidiarity, Community activities must focus on those areas where activity at Community level offers added value. A lack of resources at Community level should not be the reason behind spurring Member States into action, as is the case in the draft report. Finally, digital information offers candidate countries with an ailing rail and road infrastructure possibilities for economic development. It is not enough to spread expertise, however. Flanking policy is vital if we are actually to benefit from the knowledge society. This may comprise organisational and technical structures, as well as training. The report does not give sufficient consideration to this aspect."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph