Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2010-11-25-Speech-4-948"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2010-11-25"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Explanations of vote2
dcterms:Language	"de"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20101125.24.4-948"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2010-11-25-Speech-4-9472
lpv:speaker	lp:Andreas Mölzer2
lpv:spokenAs	substitute; AFCO (2009-07-16--2012-01-18)3 member; NA (2009-07-14--2014-06-30)3 member; AFET (2009-07-16--2012-01-18)3 member; Delegation to the EU-Ukraine Parliamentary Cooperation Committee (2009-09-16--2014-06-30)3 unknown; Freiheitliche Partei Österreichs (2009-07-14--2014-06-30)3 substitute; Delegation to the EU-Chile Joint Parliamentary Committee (2009-09-16--2014-06-30)3
lpv:translated text	"The EU institutions normally cooperate very well with the European Ombudsman. If everything is regulated in the EU, for example, the permissible payment deadlines for companies, it seems strange that the Commission, on the other hand, when consulting with a third party, is not in a position to set a deadline for this third party that enables it to meet its own deadlines. If we consider the fact that the Commission has only managed to meet the internal EU deadlines in less than a fifth of cases, this reflects a disregard for good manners. It is nothing short of regrettable when a special report by the Ombudsman is required in order to make public something as simple as access to documents to which EU citizens have a right. To quote the words of the Ombudsman: citizens have a right to know what the EU and its administration are doing. Perhaps I might expand on this by saying that our citizens also have a right to know how the European Union spends its taxes and where resources are wasted. Therefore, I can only vote in favour of the report."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph