Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-07-07-Speech-4-106"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2005-07-07"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Explanations of vote2
dcterms:Language	"de"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20050707.22.4-106"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2005-07-07-Speech-4-1072
lpv:speaker	lp:Othmar Karas2
lpv:spokenAs	member; Delegation for relations with Japan (2004-09-15--2007-03-13)3 substitute; Delegation for relations with the People's Republic of China (2004-09-16--2007-03-13)3 substitute; JURI (2005-04-25--2007-01-14)3 unknown; Österreichische Volkspartei - Liste Ursula Stenzel (2004-07-20--2009-07-13)3 substitute; IMCO (2004-07-22--2007-01-14)3 vice-chair; EPP-ED (2004-11-14--2007-02-14)3 member; ECON (2004-07-21--2007-01-14)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, I just wanted to make it clear that I twice voted against Amendment 43 when we voted on the Isler Béguin report, not out of any ignorance of the content or of the proposal by the Committee of the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety, but because we should ask ourselves the fundamental question of whether individual committees should now, while we are in the middle of a debate on the financial perspectives, be able to adopt resolutions that go against what we resolved in relation to the Böge Report. We will only have any clout in our negotiations with the Council if we, no matter how legitimate the individual committees’ opinions may be, do not, in anticipation of the decision on the financial perspectives, sabotage the basis on which our decisions are arrived at. It is for that reason, bearing in mind our negotiations on the financial perspectives, that we have voted against."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph