Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2012-10-23-Speech-2-314-000"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2012-10-23"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Protocol to the Euro-Mediterranean Agreement establishing an association between the EC and Israel on Conformity Assessment and Acceptance of Industrial Products (CAA) (debate)2
dcterms:Language	"sv"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20121023.17.2-314-000"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2012-10-23-Speech-2-315-0002
lpv:speaker	lp:Alf Svensson2
lpv:spokenAs	member; DEVE (2012-01-19--2014-06-30)3 member; EPP (2009-07-14--2014-06-30)3 substitute; AFET (2012-01-19--2014-06-30)3 vice-chair; Delegation for relations with South Africa (2009-09-30--2014-06-30)3 substitute; Delegation for relations with Israel (2009-09-16--2014-06-30)3 unknown; Kristdemokraterna (2009-07-14--2014-06-30)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, it would be interesting to compare a debate like this one on the trade agreement with Israel to debates that have been held on other trade agreements all over the world. It has been said that this would be some sort of gift or reward for Benjamin Netanyahu. After all, it is a good thing to reject the EU’s own capacity to engage in trade, and it is a remarkable way of thinking, is it not? Of course we know that today, here in this Europe of ours, unimaginable quantities of medicines originating from Israel are prescribed. They are said to be in the order of 3.5 million per day. We also know that these medicines are cheaper, as has recently been said in this House. After all, it is not completely wrong if the EU can procure something that is cheaper and of the highest quality when it is a matter of fighting type 2 diabetes and multiple sclerosis, and reducing blood pressure. Someone in this Chamber said that we always talk about human rights whenever we talk about China. That is true, although I have not heard anyone say that we should break off trade with China. If that is the case, this should be one of the consequences. We cannot talk about the Occupied Territories without at the same time daring to say why those territories are occupied and why Israel does not stay behind the 1967 borders. I think it is tremendously simplistic to forget all about that, if we do have to take it up in this debate, which should not be necessary at all but which so very many people have done. This agreement was, therefore, approved two and a half years ago, and is now being messed about and tinkered with here. It would be right and honest to talk about why it is being tinkered with, because this is absurd. Instead, we are infecting the opportunities for making an impact on the Middle East, and of course people believed that Parliament would not want to do that."@en1
lpv:videoURI	<go to Events_and_structure europarl>2

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph