Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-09-25-Speech-1-114"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20060925.15.1-114"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Mr President, I shall not be addressing you today in my capacity as the official PSE Group shadow, so I shall not be taking my three minutes’ speaking time. I only wish to say that I support the conclusions of the Ferber report.
This report argues that there is in fact a breach of faith between the City of Strasbourg and this institution. This is something I can wholeheartedly support. Two public institutions dealing with public money should behave in a way that is not only legally just but also ethically and morally acceptable. After having participated in this working party, I find that in the tripartite negotiations one party has consistently acted according to those ethically just principles, and one party, namely the City of Strasbourg, has not.
I have become known in my short time in this Parliament as one of the leaders of the anti-Strasbourg campaign. I am not used to using words like ‘anti-’ because basically I do not like the way it rings. I have tried my utmost to avoid mixing up the discussions on Parliament’s seat with the discussions on whether tax money has been well spent. I would like to put it to Parliament today that the only people who have consistently mixed up these two debates have been, firstly, the Mayor of Strasbourg, who, when she addressed us during her hearing, reminded us that having such a debate was in fact quite dangerous because the Alsace region has a very symbolic meaning. I am absolutely convinced that this is true and I totally agree.
That is why I should like to use this short time in the sitting today to ask the City of Strasbourg – if what it says is really true and if it really believes that this is a region that deserves to be honoured – why is it that since 1979 it has consistently acted in a way that, to put it mildly, is inconsistent with that aim?
These are two public institutions that are trying to do the best for their citizens. I stand here because I wish to ensure that the money that Dutch citizens pay into the account of the European Union is well spent.
I should just like to point out that, according to the auditors’ report, it has not been well spent and that this has in fact been, to put it mildly, ..."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples