Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-12-15-Speech-1-051"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20031215.6.1-051"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, I advocate here the position adopted by Parliament at first reading. We wanted to safeguard the voluntary and unpaid donation of cells and tissues and ban the trade in unmodified cells and tissues, while at the same time protecting industrial activity in this area. The Council wanted to abrogate Parliament’s position on non-payment, suggesting it was an ethical question outside the competence of the EU.
In my opinion it would be a big mistake to exclude ethical issues from EU decision-making, especially when we talk about a Community which likes to call itself a community of values. Besides, ethical issues rarely arise in isolation in some moral vacuum. They are ethical for the very reason that they have an effect on people’s health, for example, as in this case. Here we arrive at a key policy issue in which Parliament’s work, under the leadership of my colleague, Peter Liese, is extremely important.
A certain Italian film director – if in honour of Italy’s presidential term, coming to its end as it is, I may return once again in this House to the subject of Italian films – said that the way you define the angle of view is an ethical choice. Ethical issues cannot be passed over, because that in itself is an ethical choice. I, who had an education in philosophy, feel compelled to say this.
We also have a responsibility for how the rest of the world imitates our practices. If we allow trade in human body parts we have to bear in mind that the developing countries will follow Europe’s example. This sort of commercialisation will lead to exploitation, and, moreover, to increased risk. The approach chosen by the Council also risks accusations of inconsistency. Several Member States of the European Union have signed a Convention on bioethics which categorically prohibits the financial exploitation of the human body and its parts.
Our rapporteur’s conclusion is well argued. The legal basis of the Directive is Article 152 of the Treaty on European Union, which deals with health matters, but all the ‘ethical issues’ addressed by Parliament are also linked to protecting the health of donors and recipients. Any donation made in dubious circumstances, for example in response to financial pressure, is also a danger for the recipient of cells and tissues. This view is also widely shared within the Council."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples