Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-10-25-Speech-3-011"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2000-10-25"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Approval of the Minutes of the previous sitting2
dcterms:Language	"fr"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20001025.1.3-011"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2000-10-25-Speech-3-0122
lpv:speaker	lp:Robert Goebbels2
lpv:spokenAs	vice-chair; PES (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3,3 member; Members from the European Parliament to the Joint Parliamentary Assembly of the Agreement between the African, Caribbean and Pacific States and the European Union (ACP-EU) (1999-09-14--2002-01-14)3,3 member; ECON (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3,3 substitute; Committee on Industry, External Trade, Research and Energy (1999-07-22--2001-03-13)3,3 unknown; Parti ouvrier socialiste luxembourgeois (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3,3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, Mr Evans has just referred to yesterday morning’s vote, specifically to the vote at which certain amendments were adopted by a majority of one. I believe it is as well for Parliament to keep to the current Rules because, as another Member rightly said, very often it is not the machines that did not work but the Members that forgot to vote; if we were able to correct a vote after the event, we would never see the end of it. We had a good example in the final vote on Mr Evans’ report. If I had known that the total number of abstentions and votes against was going to be greater than the number of votes in favour of Mr Evans’ report, I would have asked my Group to vote against that report and it would not have been adopted. So you can see how absurd the situation would become if a vote could be reconsidered, and I think we would be well advised to go on abiding by our Rules as they stand."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph