Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-06-12-Speech-3-132"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2002-06-12"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Vote (continuation)2
dcterms:Language	"nl"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20020612.3.3-132"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2002-06-12-Speech-3-3342
lpv:speaker	lp:Erik Meijer2
lpv:spokenAs	member; Committee on Regional Policy, Transport and Tourism (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3 unknown; Socialistische Partij (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 member_of_the_bureau; EUL/NGL (1999-10-13--2004-07-19)3 member; Delegation to the EU-Slovak Republic Joint Parliamentary Committee (2002-02-07--2004-04-30)3 substitute; Delegation to the EU-Czech Republic Joint Parliamentary Committee (2002-02-07--2004-04-30)3 substitute; Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3
lpv:translated text	". A parliament can only function well if at least the following three conditions are met. First of all, it must be a recognisable reflection, constantly nourished by society, of the clashing views and interests in that society. Secondly, there must be sufficient opportunity to make this clash visible in the public debate, which is achieved most effectively if, before the decisions are taken, the Members can react to each other or can ask for clarifications by means of interruptions and a second round of debate. Thirdly, the electorate must have the certainty that Parliament itself can take initiatives, and takes the final decisions on legislation, budget and coalition forming by simple majority. Unfortunately, the European Parliament meets none of these criteria, a fact that is not altered by the proposed amendments to the Rules of Procedure. These amendments mainly relate to restricting speaking time, to time-consuming procedures for selecting more rigorously the amendments to be voted on and to opportunities for presidents, on their own initiative, to give the floor to backbenchers sympathetic to them. These changes benefit the two largest groups, but are disadvantageous to anyone who wants to show what alternative decisions are desirable and possible. As a result, the European Parliament remains a kind of senate that is far removed from the people, where the tenor of the meetings is the explanations of vote and the communication of"@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph