Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2012-07-03-Speech-2-412-000"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2012-07-03"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement between the EU and its Member States, Australia, Canada, Japan, the Republic of Korea, Mexico, Morocco, New Zealand, Singapore, Switzerland and the USA (debate)2
dcterms:Language	"sv"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20120703.21.2-412-000"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2012-07-03-Speech-2-413-0002
lpv:speaker	lp:Christofer Fjellner2
lpv:spokenAs	member; Delegation for relations with Belarus (2009-09-16--2014-06-30)3 substitute; ENVI (2012-01-19--2014-06-30)3 member; INTA (2012-01-19--2014-06-30)3 substitute; Delegation for relations with Iran (2009-09-16--2014-06-30)3 substitute; Delegation to the Cariforum — EU Parliamentary Committee (2010-06-16--2014-06-30)3 member; Delegation to the Euronest Parliamentary Assembly (2009-09-16--2014-06-30)3 substitute; CONT (2012-01-19--2013-07-08)3 unknown; Moderata Samlingspartiet (2009-07-14--2014-06-30)3 member_of_the_bureau; EPP (2012-02-03--2014-06-30)3
lpv:translated text	"Madam President, tomorrow we will vote on the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement and I would like to start by making it clear what I and the Group of the European People’s Party (Christian Democrats) think about this. We need international cooperation in order to defend intellectual property rights, to put a stop to counterfeit medicines and vehicle parts, to stop violations of European patents and piracy of European products and to safeguard Europe’s competitiveness. ACTA is a good basis for this work. It would, however, be irresponsible to vote on ACTA tomorrow – to take a position before we have all of the cards on the table and before the European Court of Justice has issued its opinion on the agreement. This is not a reasonable and responsible way to deal with this issue. I would like to ask all those who are opposed to waiting for the Court of Justice just one thing: why? What is it that you are so afraid the Court of Justice will say that you feel it is necessary, at all costs, to vote before the EU’s highest judicial body has expressed its opinion? Tomorrow’s vote is not just about ACTA. It is about patient safety, research, air safety, competitiveness, the environment, job security, etc., as these areas are all affected by piracy, patent violations and counterfeiting. Therefore, voting ‘no’ tomorrow carries a great deal of responsibility. It may perhaps resolve the conflict regarding ACTA, but it will not represent a solution to the problems and challenges that Europe is facing. Voting ‘no’ will not maintain the status quo either. It will weaken Europe’s voice on the world stage. How are we to be able to convince India to take forceful action against counterfeit medicines if we ourselves have rejected European or international cooperation based on our own legislation? It is no surprise to me that those in this House who do not want intellectual property rights or who do not believe we should protect intellectual property rights will vote against ACTA before we have the Court’s opinion, in the same way as it is no surprise that someone who does not want Europe to fight against climate change does not want the Kyoto Protocol either. However, I do not believe that reflects the opinion of the majority of us in this House, and therefore I hope you will not want to put an end to ACTA before we have all the cards on the table. Why is that? Well, we need international cooperation on intellectual property rights in order to protect European jobs, consumers, patients, etc. That is why we should not discard ACTA tomorrow."@en1
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata	"(The speaker agreed to take a blue-card question under Rule 149(8))"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