Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-06-11-Speech-2-204"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2002-06-11"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Green Paper on consumer protection/Contamination of food by nitrofen2
dcterms:Language	"nl"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20020611.11.2-204"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2002-06-11-Speech-2-2052
lpv:speaker	lp:Jan Mulder2
lpv:spokenAs	member; Delegation to the EU-Poland Joint Parliamentary Committee (2002-02-06--2004-04-30)3,3 member; ELDR (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3,3 substitute; CONT (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3,3 substitute; AGRI (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3,3 member; BUDG (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3,3 unknown; Volkspartij voor Vrijheid en Democratie (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3,3 substitute; Delegation to the EU-Hungary Joint Parliamentary Committee (2002-02-06--2004-04-30)3,3 vice-chair; Temporary committee on foot and mouth disease (2002-02-21--2002-12-17)3,3
lpv:translated text	"I thank the Commissioner for his statement. Only in the last two sentences did he mention the role of the Food and Veterinary Office in Dublin. Since the Bureau has been in existence for some six or seven years, I wonder why it did not find this out sooner. As the Commissioner stated, the problem involving nitrofen has been around for some five or six years. If the Food and Veterinary Office in Dublin is indeed supposed to check the inspectors in the Member States, then it is a little late in tracking down this instance of food contamination. Why is that? Can the Commissioner give an explanation for this? How often, for example, have inspections taken place and how often do inspections take place in other countries to check on this type of thing and especially on organic production."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph