Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-03-14-Speech-2-203"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2000-03-14"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Question Time (Commission)2
dcterms:Language	"fi"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20000314.10.2-203"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2000-03-14-Speech-2-2042
lpv:speaker	lp:Piia-Noora Kauppi2
lpv:spokenAs	substitute; EMPL (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 unknown; Kansallinen Kokoomus (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 member; Delegation for relations with the United States (1999-10-06--2002-01-14)3 member; ECON (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 member; EPP-ED (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, Commissioner, I suppose our parliamentary members should be satisfied with the consultation procedure at this stage, although I myself agree with Mr Clegg that it should have been possible – to touch briefly on legal matters – to invoke the assent procedure by now. My question, however, concerns concrete matters and the substance of this agreement. When talks between the EU and China commenced, we MEPs were told that there would really not be any great problems, as approximately 80% of the EU objectives were contained in the outcome of the negotiations between the United States and China. Now, however, it would seem that the rest, the remaining 20%, are so problematic, that time is passing by and the talks have already ended in deadlock on many occasions. I would like to ask whether it is a question of the Chinese not being prepared to accord us the same negotiating status as they did the US representatives or why we should not be able to achieve consensus on the remaining – the tail end – 20%."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph