Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-10-25-Speech-3-100"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2000-10-25"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Vote2
dcterms:Language	"fr"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20001025.6.3-100"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2000-10-25-Speech-3-1012
lpv:speaker	lp:Gérard Onesta2
lpv:spokenAs	vice-president; Parliament's Bureau (1999-07-20--2002-01-14)3,3 unknown; Les Verts-Europe-Ecologie (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3,3 vice-president; European Parliament (1999-07-20--2002-01-14)3,3 substitute; Delegation to the European Economic Area Joint Parliamentary Committee (EEA) (1999-12-16--2002-01-14)3,3 member; BUDG (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3,3 member; Delegation for relations with Australia and New Zealand (1999-09-28--2002-01-14)3,3 substitute; AFCO (1999-07-22--2002-01-14)3,3 member; G/EFA (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3,3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, we have a slight problem with the wording. We have just improved Paragraph 19. But as a result of this little textual substitution we have let fall by the wayside an important principle that the European Parliament has always called for. The fact is that, whatever our opinion on either side, whether we are for or against a constitution, we all agree that our Parliament should give its assent. Thanks to this substitution, the term found in the original paragraph has been left out. So, with the agreement of Olivier Duhamel, the rapporteur, I suggest incorporating this principle in the last line of Paragraph 20, which would therefore read as follows: “from the moment the process is initiated up to the approval (after receiving the assent of the European Parliament) of the final version of the Constitution”. We would add these eight words. That addition would bring Parliament into line with all its debates and all its votes."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph