Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-04-14-Speech-5-118"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20000414.5.5-118"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, I would firstly like to explain why I voted the way I did: I voted in favour of the joint motion for a resolution because I agree with the serious concerns and actions it puts forward, although this does not represent a change in my Group’s position. Our position is that we have concerns about the Union’s courts having responsibility for forestry policy.
Nor can I fail to mention the fact, which has already been referred to here, that the saboteurs of this morning’s sitting did not take part in the vote, and I am delighted that the PPE has suggested a nominal vote, which will clarify the matter. There is a French saying about the
the biter being bit. Here we have the
the saboteur hoist with his own petard. It is deplorable that we have been involved in this circus. Those concerned could have made a point of order, since it is an important issue that the Bureau and the Conference of Presidents have to address. But they went too far. They showed no consideration for Ethiopia and sabotaged the votes. They then suggested a nominal vote so a count could be taken. As we can see, however, when we take a decision here on an issue related to storms, disasters or Europe’s interests, that is, serious matters, they are no longer present. Almost none of the 32 gladiators were present for the final vote, which is utterly deplorable and which clearly reveals the true intentions of those who destabilised this morning’s sitting."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
"arroseur arrosé"1
"saboteur saboté"1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples