Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2014-07-15-Speech-2-144-000"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20140715.9.2-144-000"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Mr President, at the start of this new Parliament I want to lay out my Group’s position on TTIP as clearly as possible. We in the Socialist and Democratic Group believe that TTIP does have the potential to be a significant catalyst for jobs and growth, and we know that this could be the EU’s last chance to be a setter of global standards. If we do nothing we will be relegated from leaders to followers; it will be China, India, and Brazil who will set the global standards, putting our industries at a significant disadvantage.
As well as regulatory cooperation, we want to see the United States open up to European investment its transport sector and its public procurement, to level the playing field for our industries. We want to see quality European products such as Parma ham and Feta cheese given strong geographic protection against genetic products and misleading marketing, and we want to give our small and medium-sized enterprises the same opportunities as multinationals currently enjoy in easy access to the US market. We do accept that this agreement could and should benefit consumers, and that is why we welcome the fact that the Commission has involved consumer groups, NGOs and trade unions in the European discussion on priorities.
For all of these reasons the Socialists were proud to be at the birth of TTIP, and we do not want to have to be its assassins. I want to tell the Commission clearly now, though, that if we have to be, we will be, and that is why we want the Commission to listen carefully to our concerns, such as those over food safety. Regulatory convergence must not lead to chlorinated chickens, hormone-treated beef or GMOs getting access to the European Union market. We have had assurances from the Commission on this but I want to tell you that we will keep reminding you of this and we will keep watching you throughout the whole of the negotiations. Similarly with our concerns over investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS): we do not believe that this consultation is the end of the process. We want to ensure that the Commission listens carefully to public opinion on this issue and that ISDS does not become a backdoor route for a corporate power grab.
We also have concerns about public services; again we have had some assurances from the Commission, but we want to make sure that our public services remain of the highest standard and receive the highest possible protection. We want to make sure that in this trade agreement there is no ratchet effect and there is no ability to prevent Member States returning health, education and other vital services to public control if they have been privatised. So we will keep scrutinising TTIP to make sure that the quality of our services remains high, that corporate power is not increased unnecessarily, that our high levels of protection are retained.
But we have to say to the Commission: we recognise that a good TTIP would be good for Europe, and the pledge we give to the Commission and to the Member States is that we will watch the outcome of this agreement and, if we think it benefits Europe, benefits European jobs and European standards of living, we will vote for it. If we think it damages our concerns we will vote against it. We will make up our mind at the end; unlike some groups we have not made up our mind one way and unlike other groups we have not made up our mind the other way. We will judge this agreement on its merits at the end of the process."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata | |
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples