Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2008-12-17-Speech-3-179"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20081217.16.3-179"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
". −
I voted against the consolidated amendment as, from my point of view as an MEP, the rights of the European Parliament have not been upheld. At no time was Parliament given the opportunity to form an opinion; instead, it was, to all intents and purposes, left with a choice between accepting or rejecting the Council’s compromise. This is not in line with the rules of the codecision procedure, which is intended to guarantee equality between the two legislative bodies.
I have numerous reservations about the compromise from a content point of view, too. For example, it will lead to serious market distortions within the EU and impose unwarranted burdens on consumers. Owing to the undue haste to adopt the reform, alternative systems that could have achieved the desired reductions were no longer taken into account. The fact that the economic consequences for consumer purchasing power, in particular, were not even remotely investigated at the time of adoption just makes it even clearer how ill thought out this compromise is. The majority in the European Parliament bears a share of the responsibility – including towards future generations – for the entry into force of this compromise.
Alternatives were available. These would have enabled the reduction targets to be achieved at a fraction of the costs we are talking about now. A policy such as this harms not only the economy but also, in particular, the reputation of the EU."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples