Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2011-05-11-Speech-3-034-000"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2011-05-11"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Main aspects of the common foreign and security policy and the common security and defence policy - Situation in Syria and in Camp Ashraf - Report: Albertini - Annual report from the Council to Parliament on the main aspects of CFSP in 2009 - Report: Gualtieri - Development of CSDP following the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty - Report: Muñiz De Urquiza - The EU as a global actor: its role in multilateral organisations (debate)2
dcterms:Language	"en"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20110511.4.3-034-000"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2011-05-11-Speech-3-035-0002
lpv:speaker	lp:Geoffrey Van Orden2
lpv:spoken text	"Madam President, Baroness Ashton will not be surprised if I express disappointment, not in the performance of the European common security and defence policy (CSDP), but in the fact that she still insists on flogging this particular unnecessary and very expensive dead horse. She may claim that the European Union has been engaged in some 25 missions with a CSDP label. Well, it is all about the label: few of these missions stand up to scrutiny. They are either missions better performed by NATO, straightforward civilian missions, or they are passive missions involving military personnel. They have usually come about because the European Union has begged somebody to invite it to do something. Currently, there are military operations being conducted by NATO in Libya. Having failed to get a mandate to enforce the maritime embargo, the EU has been desperately trying to get the UN to invite it to carry out a humanitarian assistance programme. The fact is that neither NATO nor the UN wants the EU pretending to get involved militarily. Of course there is a great need for humanitarian assistance and the EU could play a useful role, but not in a way that merely seeks to promote a misplaced military ambition. The trouble is that the very existence of the CSDP and all its duplicative structures is divisive and encourages allies to think twice about robust commitment to NATO operations."@en1
lpv:spokenAs	member; AFET (2009-07-16--2012-01-18)3 substitute; Delegation for relations with India (2010-07-07--2014-06-30)3 unknown; Conservative Party (2009-07-14--2014-06-30)3 member; SEDE (2009-07-16--2012-01-18)3 substitute; Delegation for relations with the NATO Parliamentary Assembly (2009-09-16--2014-06-30)3 member_of_the_bureau; PECH (2009-12-04--2011-12-12)3 member; Delegation for relations with Iran (2009-09-16--2014-06-30)3 substitute; TRAN (2009-09-15--2012-01-18)3 substitute; Delegation to the EU-Turkey Joint Parliamentary Committee (2009-09-16--2014-06-30)3
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata	"(The speaker agreed to take a blue card question under Rule 149(8))"1 "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