Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-11-14-Speech-3-015"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2001-11-14"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:European Research Area (Multiannual Framework Programme 2002-2006)2
dcterms:Language	"de"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20011114.2.3-015"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2001-11-14-Speech-3-0162
lpv:speaker	lp:Peter Liese2
lpv:spokenAs	member; Temporary committee on human genetics and other new technologies in modern medicine (2000-12-13--2001-11-29)3,3 member; EPP-ED (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3,3 substitute; Committee on Industry, External Trade, Research and Energy (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3,3 unknown; Christlich Demokratische Union Deutschlands (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3,3 member; Delegation for relations with the countries of Central America and Mexico (1999-10-06--2002-01-14)3,3 member; Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3,3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy has worked intensively on the research framework programme. We have submitted many proposals on sustainable development, food safety and other subjects, which were, thankfully, generally adopted by the Committee on Industry, External Trade, Research and Energy. We focused on medical research, as we believed that it was in this area that there was the greatest need for change to the Commission's proposal. The Commission's suggestion that only biotechnology should be promoted in the health context is too narrow. Other research fields, too, promise much for health and need to be supported. I thank Mr Caudron, the rapporteur, for his commitment to this as well, and also the shadow rapporteurs, in particular Mr van Velzen, for whom this was also a matter for concern. It is regrettable that the Committee on Industry, External Trade, Research and Energy could not follow us as regards the ethical boundaries of medical research. The Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy spoke out clearly in favour of research and for the curing of illnesses, but also in favour of clear boundaries for the sake of human dignity. In particular, our Committee demands the exclusion of exploitative research on human embryos from the research framework programme. This ban is necessary not just because human life is involved, but also because we must counteract the danger of the female body being seen as raw material for industry. Embryo research is not possible without women's egg cells being made available, and the donation of egg cells puts a woman under great strain and at medical risk. It is for this reason that many feminists, too, are opposed to exploitative embryo research. As I have said, the Committee on Industry, External Trade, Research and Energy could not follow us down this road, and so, together with Mr Fiori, I have tabled an amendment that follows the line taken by the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy, which is also taken in the United States. 'Yes' to stem cell research, but 'no' to exploitative embryo research. The Americans can be accused of many things, but not of being hostile to research. I therefore ask for support for Amendment No 332, tabled by Messrs Fiori, Liese and others."@en1
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata	"(Applause)"1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph