Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2010-07-06-Speech-2-431"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2010-07-06"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Specific tasks for the European Central Bank concerning the functioning of the European Systemic Risk Board - Powers of the European Banking Authority, the European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority and the European Securities and Markets Authority - European Securities and Markets Authority - Macro-prudential oversight of the financial system and establishment of a European Systemic Risk Board - European Banking Authority - European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority - Cross-Border Crisis Management in the Banking Sector (debate)2
dcterms:Language	"fr"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20100706.28.2-431"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2010-07-06-Speech-2-4322
lpv:speaker	lp:Sylvie Goulard2
lpv:spokenAs	member; ECON (2009-07-16--2012-01-18)3 substitute; Special committee on the policy challenges and budgetary resources for a sustainable European Union after 2013 (2010-06-17--2011-06-30)3 unknown; Mouvement Démocrate (2009-07-14--2014-06-30)3 member; Delegation for relations with Japan (2009-09-16--2014-06-30)3 member; ALDE (2009-07-14--2014-06-30)3 member; Special Committee on the Financial, Economic and Social Crisis (2009-10-08--2011-07-31)3 substitute; AGRI (2009-07-16--2012-01-18)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, Commissioner, I would like to say three things. The first is that while we are flexible on the procedure, we will be even stricter on the substance. Let us be quite clear. We have made an effort. This Parliament agreed to interrupt the procedure of first reading. Nothing forced us to do that, other than the desire, which you have yourself shown, to seek a compromise, to have a discussion with each other. This should not end up as cherry picking. No. Parliament has, for a number of months now, been developing a very consistent vision, and I thank all my fellow Members for this. I cannot mention all of them. I will just mention Mr Karas as an example, who emphasised the fact that we wanted a European solution. This is our line; this is what we believe in for reasons of efficiency. My second remark has to do with the date. Yes, we want something by 1 January and, furthermore, I would say that I could repeat Mr Giegold’s words exactly: ‘we spend so much time together and we are so much in agreement that we end up repeating ourselves’, but I repeat this once again. The date is not a fetish. We do not want 1 January for its own sake. It is 1 January with good reason. What we do not want is to put pressure on Parliament only to get, on 1 January, a pretence of European supervision. Finally, I would like to thank all the shadow rapporteurs and all my colleagues here who have spoken, because we feel that there is a genuine basic unity in this Parliament. Of course, everyone has their sensitive issues here, but we need to ask ourselves – and, Commissioner, I would also have asked this question if the Presidency had been here – what will we take back to the citizens at the end of all this. Will we have at least laid the foundations – I will not go as far as saying the top floor, but at least the foundations – of a solid European house, or will we return with one of these pseudo-compromises which the Council has a taste for, but which Parliament would quite happily do without?"@en1
lpv:videoURI	<go to Events_and_structure europarl>2

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph