Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-06-16-Speech-5-064"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2000-06-16"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Community design2
dcterms:Language	"nl"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20000616.4.5-064"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2000-06-16-Speech-5-0662
lpv:speaker	lp:Marianne Thyssen2
lpv:spokenAs	member_of_the_bureau; EPP-ED (1999-10-12--2004-07-19)3,3 substitute; Delegation to the EU-Poland Joint Parliamentary Committee (1999-10-08--2002-01-14)3,3 substitute; Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3,3 member; Delegation for relations with Canada (1999-10-06--2002-01-14)3,3 unknown; Christelijke Volkspartij (1999-07-20--2001-09-30)3,3 member; ECON (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3,3
lpv:translated text	"I abstained from the vote on the amended proposal for the regulation on Community design, not because I am against having a Community system for drawings and designs. On the contrary, it is urgently needed. I abstained because I am disappointed that the Design Office is to come under the Trade Mark Office, and that we are not going to take advantage of the opportunity to devise a different language regime. The language regime of the Trade Mark Office was explicitly chosen in the old 1993 proposal for a regulation. It has been done very much on the quiet in the proposal we are dealing with now. I hope that the members of the Committee on Industry, External Trade, Research and Energy are fully aware of this, as well as all the others who are prepared to take this aspect of the regulation on board without demur. Naturally the office must be able to operate efficiently and cost-effectively. Rapid decision-making is a legitimate aim. There is no need to translate every last piece of paper. However, it is not asking too much to want the conciliation procedure and correspondence with the Office, as well as the application for registration, to take place in the citizen’s own language. When the Trade Mark Office was first set up, a discriminatory language regime was adopted under the guise of a technical solution. Now we are repeating past bad practice. What then, is the point of having an article in a Treaty that entitles the citizen to use their own language when in contact with this institution? As far as I am concerned, that is good reason to make a stand against this sequence of events."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph