Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2009-10-20-Speech-2-045"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2009-10-20"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Climate change and developing countries in the framework of the UN Conference on Climate Change in Copenhagen (debate)2
dcterms:Language	"de"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20091020.5.2-045"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2009-10-20-Speech-2-0462
lpv:speaker	lp:Richard Seeber2
lpv:spokenAs	substitute; REGI (2009-07-16--2012-01-18)3 member; Delegation to the Euro-Latin American Parliamentary Assembly (2009-09-16--2014-06-30)3 unknown; Österreichische Volkspartei (2009-07-14--2014-06-30)3 substitute; Delegation to the EU-Russia Parliamentary Cooperation Committee (2009-09-16--2014-06-30)3 member; Delegation for relations with the countries of Central America (2009-09-16--2014-06-30)3 member_of_the_bureau; EPP (2009-07-24--2014-06-30)3 member; ENVI (2009-07-16--2012-01-18)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, it is politics, and not religion, that we are debating here. For that reason, we should make a distinction between facts and empirical certainties on the one hand and hypotheses on the other. It is a fact that the global temperature has risen by around 0.7 °C when compared with the pre-industrial age. It is also a fact, however, that the temperature has hardly risen at all over the last ten years. A further fact is that Copenhagen is an international conference and that the Community’s CO emissions make up approximately 17% of the global total. The Community has already implemented legislation requiring that its CO emissions be cut by 20% by 2020. Now let us consider the hypotheses. One hypothesis is that the global temperature will continue to rise. A second hypothesis is that there is a direct connection between CO emissions and the CO content in the air and the rise in the temperature, while a third hypothesis has it that humanity can have a real influence on this CO content in the air. There are various scientific opinions on this. This is a dilemma that we, as politicians, are facing, and that we must make a decision about. It would be useful, however, to take a second observation into account in order to provide orientation for our policy making, and that observation is that all societies which work in a very efficient way with their energy and resources are very successful. In the light of this it makes sense to operate a policy that makes it possible to be energy and resource-efficient and to do so at Community level so that we can continue to play a leading role internationally from a economic policy point of view, but also to offer help to other States, especially less developed States, to take the same path. If we now look at the funds transfers that are being discussed in this regard, it is a key point that they should be very well monitored and be tied to conditions, because otherwise all we are doing is opening a second route to development aid."@en1
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata	"2"1
lpv:videoURI	<go to Events_and_structure europarl>2

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph