Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2010-03-10-Speech-3-039"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2010-03-10"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:2008 annual report on the CFSP - The implementation of the European Security Strategy and the Common Security and Defence Policy - Non-proliferation Treaty (debate)2
dcterms:Language	"en"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20100310.6.3-039"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2010-03-10-Speech-3-0402
lpv:speaker	lp:Geoffrey Van Orden2
lpv:spoken text	"Mr President, where the EU can add value, and when it does not undermine our sovereign interests or compete with organisations such as NATO, we can support it. For the most part, this will mean adopting common positions on certain key issues and civil tasks in the field of humanitarian assistance or post-conflict reconstruction and development, although I have to say that the track record of EUPOL in Afghanistan does not inspire much confidence. The simple truth is that your role as EU foreign minister is to act as handmaiden for EU political integration. The effect of the External Action Service, the chain of EU embassies around the world, will be to undermine national representation in many capitals, armed perversely with cash that has come from our nations in order to take forward someone else’s foreign policy. The report before us on EU security and defence policy is a manifesto for EU military integration, deliberately confusing military and civil crisis management in order to justify an EU role. It relies on a bogus narrative concerning EU operations and increasingly seeks to involve the Commission in areas which are properly the responsibility of our nations and of the Council. Virtually every paragraph of this report advocates ratcheting up military EU integration at the expense of NATO and the sovereign integrity of individual European countries. I recall one of the great red lines of the British Labour Government’s negotiating stance when it said it would resist the idea of a separate and permanent EU operations centre responsible for operational planning and conduct of military operations as this would be the clearest example of duplication of NATO, whose SHAPE headquarters performs precisely this role. Baroness Ashton, when I asked you about this on 11 January, you said you agreed with the position I took then. Now you seem to have changed your mind. I would be very interested to know what you really think now."@en1
lpv:spokenAs	member; AFET (2009-07-16--2012-01-18)3,3 substitute; Delegation to the ACP-EU Joint Parliamentary Assembly (2009-11-09--2010-07-06)3,3 unknown; Conservative Party (2009-07-14--2014-06-30)3,3 member; SEDE (2009-07-16--2012-01-18)3,3 substitute; Delegation for relations with the NATO Parliamentary Assembly (2009-09-16--2014-06-30)3,3 member_of_the_bureau; PECH (2009-12-04--2011-12-12)3,3 member; Delegation for relations with Iran (2009-09-16--2014-06-30)3,3 substitute; TRAN (2009-09-15--2012-01-18)3,3 substitute; Delegation to the EU-Turkey Joint Parliamentary Committee (2009-09-16--2014-06-30)3,3
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata	"Geoffrey Van Orden (ECR )."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