Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-09-05-Speech-3-164"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20010905.5.3-164"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Madam President, Mr Fatuzzo is not alone here, which is nice for him. We Members of Parliament are not normally late going to lunch, but I wanted to explain why I voted against Mrs Nicholson of Winterbourne’s and Mr Schröder’s reports. Of course, I want to welcome these countries, the Czech Republic and Romania, to the EU with open arms, but I wanted to protest about Parliament’s attitude to nuclear power. It is not our task to advise independent countries on how they are to manage their affairs regarding energy, and our own credibility suffers if we discuss the issue of nuclear power time and time again in a populist manner that ignores the facts. Numerous international study trips have been made to Temelin, for example, and it meets all the international criteria. Why should this brand new nuclear power station be demolished? Romania, on the other hand, has coal-fired power stations that are 40 years old – they are nearly as old as me – so it is only reasonable for them to build the modern Canadian nuclear plant there. I must just say that if people in the candidate countries are reading our thoughts on nuclear energy they are almost certainly choking on the coal dust and their food is going down the wrong way as well."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples