Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-02-06-Speech-3-124"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2002-02-06"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Financing of development aid with a view to the UN International Conference (continuation)2
dcterms:Language	"es"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20020206.6.3-124"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2002-02-06-Speech-3-1252
lpv:speaker	lp:Miguel Angel Martínez Martínez2
lpv:spokenAs	member; PES (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 substitute; Committee on Foreign Affairs, Human Rights, Common Security and Defence Policy (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3 unknown; Partido Socialista Obrero Español (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 member; Committee on Development and Cooperation (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, the Cooperation Council, which was held under the Belgian Presidency produced a series of conclusions that define the issues our representatives must defend in Monterrey. We were surprised, a few days ago, by what the President-in-Office of the Council had to say to us in the Committee on Development and Cooperation: we must do everything we can to ensure that Monterrey does not end without agreement and the European Union has to negotiate with the United States until it concludes an agreement with them. The problem is that the extraordinarily restrictive positions of the American administration will be even more restrictive if the European Union makes it known that it is willing to accept anything as long as an agreement is concluded, regardless of its content. Now that we know the content of the draft consensus drawn up by those preparing the Conference, our fears are all the more well founded. This statement contains no binding commitment on contributions and on a timetable for financing development. If these turned out to be the Conference’s conclusions, Monterrey would be just another wasted opportunity Seeking agreement must be one of our objectives at the Conference, but concluding an agreement cannot mean making concessions on commitments, such as allocating 0.7 % of GDP, or a timetable for making this contribution with which to finance development. Nor should we go back on targets on which a commitment has already been given for 2015, such as the 50% reduction in people living in conditions of extreme poverty, the two-thirds reduction in current infant mortality rates and the universal provision of primary education for all of the world’s children, boys and girls."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph