Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-06-04-Speech-3-104"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2003-06-04"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Vote2
dcterms:Language	"nl"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20030604.3.3-104"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2003-06-04-Speech-3-1052
lpv:speaker	lp:Jules Maaten2
lpv:spokenAs	unknown; Volkspartij voor Vrijheid en Democratie (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 member_of_the_bureau; ELDR (2002-03-07--2004-07-19)3 member; Delegation for relations with the Member States of ASEAN, south-east Asia and the Republic of Korea (2002-02-07--2004-07-19)3 substitute; Committee on Foreign Affairs, Human Rights, Common Security and Defence Policy (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3 member; Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3
lpv:translated text	". The reimbursement of Members’ travel expenses must be based on the expenses actually incurred and all Members must receive the same salary. Many of the things that Parliament is adopting with the Rothley report on the Statute for Members of the European Parliament, such as the late entry into force in 2009 and the subordination of future fellow Members from the accession countries, I do not like. I would also have liked to see the majority of this House show a greater readiness to compromise. It will now be very difficult to bring the governments and MEPs into line with one another. We in the Group of the European Liberal, Democrat and Reform Party, however, are prepared to make compromises, because in the end statutory provision has to be made for these things. Moreover, it is the last chance before enlargement to regulate the Statute for Members and with it a better travel expenses scheme. All things considered I have therefore voted for the Rothley report because keeping things as they are is not acceptable."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph