Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-11-15-Speech-4-144"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2001-11-15"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Vote2
dcterms:Language	"nl"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20011115.5.4-144"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2001-11-15-Speech-4-1502
lpv:speaker	lp:Erik Meijer2
lpv:spokenAs	unknown; Socialistische Partij (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 member_of_the_bureau; EUL/NGL (1999-10-13--2004-07-19)3 member; Committee on Regional Policy, Transport and Tourism (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 member; Delegation to the EU-Slovak Republic Joint Parliamentary Committee (1999-09-29--2002-01-14)3 substitute; Temporary committee on human genetics and other new technologies in modern medicine (2000-12-13--2001-11-29)3 substitute; Delegation to the EU-Czech Republic Joint Parliamentary Committee (2000-11-09--2002-01-14)3 substitute; Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3
lpv:translated text	". The reason why I am unable to vote for this resolution is that it is mainly founded on the idea of protecting the expansion of aviation which, until recently, was deemed self-evident. To date, this expansion has posed a major problem for the environment, leading to increasing levels of pollution, growing insecurity and increasing pressure on public space for airports. Furthermore, aviation firmly had the edge on railways in terms of taxes, because kerosene is still not taxed, while all forms of travel on the ground are. Even before 11 September, there was every reason to search for possibilities to stop and reverse this expansion. The fact that the number of passengers has now dropped dramatically should not be a reason for supporting airline companies by granting even more tax money, but rather a reason for investing in the improvement of other forms of intra-European passenger transport. A surcharge on the aircraft rates which have taken a nose dive over the last few years due to competition can cover the dramatic upsurge in insurance premiums. There is no reason for injecting more public funding into aviation. However, that money is needed desperately to protect the position of the workers of airline companies. They thought for years that they had a secure, government-protected job in a growth industry, but the industry is now shrinking or even going bankrupt."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph