Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/1999-12-15-Speech-3-333"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"1999-12-15"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Late payment in commercial transactions2
dcterms:Language	"nl"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.19991215.12.3-333"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:1999-12-15-Speech-3-3342
lpv:speaker	lp:Marianne Thyssen2
lpv:spokenAs	member_of_the_bureau; EPP-ED (1999-10-12--2004-07-19)3 substitute; Delegation to the EU-Poland Joint Parliamentary Committee (1999-10-08--2002-01-14)3 substitute; Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 member; Delegation for relations with Canada (1999-10-06--2002-01-14)3 unknown; Christelijke Volkspartij (1999-07-20--2001-09-30)3 member; ECON (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, when the common position arrived here, as the former shadow rapporteur of my group, I felt slightly abandoned by the rapporteur of first reading who had left this House. When it also transpired that the file of the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs had been passed on to the Industry Committee, then I felt completely orphaned, but the coordinator and the new EPP shadow rapporteur have adopted me in the Industry Committee for a short while, which made up for a lot of things and for which I would like to express my thanks to both. I would also like to say a word of thanks to the rapporteur, Mr Murphy, who has done a sterling job. Mr President, the common position is better than the original proposal. The Industry Committee, however, has incorporated a few more amendments and I hope that they can be conciliated swiftly because the SMEs are desperate for the entry into effect of this directive, but quality should come before speed. The report meets with my full approval. I still have questions but only with regard to the bill of exchange, Amendment No 18. I am aware that the bill of exchange is used in one of our Member States as a means to counter excessive payments. However, I do think that the bill of exchange is too strict an instrument. It is an unconditional order to pay a certain sum on a certain day and even if there are serious reasons for challenging the claim, one cannot refer to them as the debtor. If the bill also needs to be guaranteed and accepted by a bank, then this becomes an expensive business. Personally, I hold the opinion that we should confine ourselves to judicial review on account of unreasonable terms. I would like to know the Commissioner’s opinion regarding this Amendment No 18."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph