Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2007-09-25-Speech-2-382"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2007-09-25"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:European Institute of Technology (debate)2
dcterms:Language	"es"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20070925.34.2-382"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2007-09-25-Speech-2-3832
lpv:speaker	lp:David Hammerstein2
lpv:spokenAs	unknown; Los Verdes (2004-07-20--2009-07-13)3 substitute; AFET (2007-01-31--2009-07-13)3 member; ITRE (2007-01-31--2009-07-13)3 member; G/EFA (2004-07-20--2009-07-13)3 member; Delegation to the Euro-Mediterranean Parliamentary Assembly (2004-09-15--2009-07-13)3 member; Delegation for relations with Israel (2007-03-14--2009-07-13)3 member; PETI (2007-01-31--2009-07-13)3 substitute; Delegation for relations with the Palestinian Legislative Council (2007-03-14--2009-07-13)3
lpv:translated text	". Mr President, we are really sorry, but this proposal is not serious. Once again Europe wants to act but cannot. The Greens were in favour of the Institute project, but of a real project, and the proposals that are on the table are inadequate and incoherent. After the negotiations, the question of funding has still not been resolved. The European proposal of EUR 308 million is clearly inadequate and, moreover, it is a much, much lower figure than what the European Commission itself proposed based on its studies. We therefore have before us an invitation to gobble up and weaken other European projects such as the Seventh Research Framework Programme. If the European Commission really wants to establish the Institute, as we do, the negotiations will have to be restarted on the financial perspective and a real budget will have to be created, a large budget of more than EUR 2 billion, which is what is needed. In short, if we want to promote research and technology, we need to back it, we cannot give cannon fodder to the eurosceptics, as we are doing with such an incoherent project. There are also problems with the content. We have removed the ceiling on administrative expenditure; we have required a ceiling for all projects, but here we have removed it. We have also removed one of the main issues of life in general – climate change – which was going to be one of the issues, one of the main ones in fact, and has been removed. This is very shocking, very shocking. In short, here we have a project that obviously has no ambition, no money behind it and does not have a coherent project, which we deeply regret."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph