Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2011-02-14-Speech-1-077-000"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20110214.14.1-077-000"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, we are dealing with the subject of enhanced cooperation here for a second time. A few months ago, we decided on enhanced cooperation for the first time under the Treaty of Lisbon in relation to the field of family law. Now we are to do so a second time. It is a purely procedural decision that is to be taken here. I want to make that clear, because at this point, we will not be debating the content of the issues in question. That will take place at a later date.
Let me start by observing that I have been very pleased to see that the Hungarian Presidency is also present here today. This is a first, you might say, as I believe this is the first time in the history of the European Parliament that the Presidency has been present on a Monday evening. This also shows, perhaps, how important this portfolio that we are debating today actually is.
We have been debating the issue of the European patent on the basis of a proposal from the Commission since 2001. Within the framework of the Palacio report, Parliament took a very specific position, including in relation to potential solutions, in respect of first reading. It proved impossible to reach agreement about the patent in the Council, which was essentially due to two problems. One of the problems is the courts issue – which courts are to be competent for which disputes – but there was also the language issue. The courts issue will possibly be resolved soon through a decision of the European Court of Justice in an opinion at the beginning of March, at which point we will know precisely what can and cannot be done.
When it comes to the language issue, no progress has been made. Last autumn, the Belgian Presidency had to concede that it was clearly impossible to reach a solution on the language issue, or at least to do so and also meet the requirement for unanimity as envisaged under the Treaty of Lisbon. There is quite simply a diametric contrast between the principle that the European Union has 23 official languages that are supposed to be equal and the fact that a patent can give rise to enormous costs, specifically through translation. Against this background, there is also always the problem that, if we have a patent translated into all the languages, this patent is of no use to small and medium-sized enterprises as it is much too expensive, irrespective of the risk of the legal disputes that may exist in the various Member States. This type of patent in many languages under the current European Patent Office system is actually only for large companies rather than for small and medium-sized enterprises. That is something that surely has to change.
Since 2000, the European Parliament has, on dozens of occasions, called in its resolutions for progress to finally be made on the European patent – with a view to the Lisbon process and the new 2020 process. I think it really is enough now. The Belgian Presidency asked the Commission to bring forward a specific proposal for the enhanced cooperation process. The Commission has taken on this initiative. The Council has formally asked us for our assent. The Committee on Legal Affairs has emphatically given its backing, by 16 votes to 5. In the meantime, 25 Member States are now behind this proposal. It is now quite simply time to take a step forwards and to give consent from our side – Parliament’s side – to this procedure so that there is finally some light at the end of the tunnel.
I have one more point to close with. We do not have many resources in Europe. What we do have is our intelligence, our creativity and the ideas that are born on this continent. It is therefore also of critical importance for us that these ideas are also protected. I ask myself, how can we actually turn round to China, India and many other major developing countries in the world and tell them that they must protect intellectual property rights when we are not even in a position to do that here in Europe? We therefore need this qualitative progress to a European patent now. That is why I am backing this proposal for enhanced cooperation and why I am calling on you all to support it."@en1
|
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples