Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-03-14-Speech-2-147"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2006-03-14"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Explanations of vote2
dcterms:Language	"sk"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20060314.21.2-147"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2006-03-14-Speech-2-1482
lpv:speaker	lp:Milan Gaľa2
lpv:spokenAs	member; CULT (2004-09-16--2007-01-14)3 unknown; Slovenská demokratická a kresťanská únia (2004-07-20--2009-07-13)3 substitute; Delegation to the EU-Russia Parliamentary Cooperation Committee (2004-09-15--2009-07-13)3 member; EPP-ED (2004-07-20--2009-07-13)3 substitute; DEVE (2004-09-16--2007-01-14)3 member; Delegation for relations with the Gulf States, including Yemen (2004-09-15--2007-03-13)3 substitute; ENVI (2004-07-22--2007-01-14)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, I have abstained from voting on the Matsakis report into the Commission’s strategy on mercury, and I would like to explain why. My formal background is that of a dentist, and I know that the amendments concerning the prompt banning of amalgam from dentistry are not feasible, especially in the new Member States, and primarily for economic reasons. As dental fillings made from materials other than amalgam are three times more expensive, their application would impose an unreasonable burden on health insurance companies. At the same time, the evidence concerning the harmful effects of amalgam is both unclear and incomplete. We should certainly improve the disposal of amalgam waste in dentistry departments, but we should not ban dentists from using mercury. I also believe that the Member States should be responsible for the relevant legislation. This view is shared by the Slovak Chamber of Dentists, and that is why I did not vote for the report to be approved."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph