Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2011-12-13-Speech-2-390-000"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2011-12-13"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Common security and defence policy (Article 36 TEU) - Impact of the financial crisis on the defence sector (debate)2
dcterms:Language	"en"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20111213.29.2-390-000"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2011-12-13-Speech-2-391-0002
lpv:speaker	lp:Geoffrey Van Orden2
lpv:spoken text	"Mr President, Mr Lisek has produced a detailed and well written report. Unfortunately, however, he draws the wrong conclusions. It seems that the answer to every problem in this House is more Europe. It is all about European integration. Our concern here instead should be more military capability and greater solidarity in NATO. That means serious operational commitment and political will, two elements sadly lacking in so many European countries. I am afraid that the very real threats and challenges that we face will not be resolved by trying to apply the same procedures to defence as we have seen applied to the euro. The European Union should stop meddling in defence. Its ambition is a dangerous, wasteful distraction. The Libyan crisis should have provided more than enough evidence that CSDP was irrelevant. No one wanted an EU military involvement – neither the United Nations, nor indeed NATO – and the Libyan experience revealed very starkly the potential dangers of the pooling and sharing concept, which seemed so attractive to EU policy makers. Germany even withdrew its crews from NATO surveillance aircraft, the AWACS, operating over Libya. What sort of example is that? Of the 28 countries who agreed NATO operations over Libya, less than half actually participated and fewer than a third were willing to participate in strike missions. How could you expect a country such as the United Kingdom, or indeed France, to rely on someone else to provide a vital military capability on our behalf? This report trots out the Eurocrats’ line, their desperate quest for an invented strategic autonomy of the European Union, when actually we should be ensuring that our armed forces have the capabilities and interoperability to deploy alongside our closest and strongest military ally, which is the United States."@en1
lpv:spokenAs	member; AFET (2009-07-16--2012-01-18)3,3 substitute; Delegation for relations with India (2010-07-07--2014-06-30)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; 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	"(The speaker agreed to take a blue-card question under Rule149(8))"1 "Geoffrey Van Orden,"1 "on behalf of the ECR Group."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