Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2011-02-15-Speech-2-391-500"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2011-02-15"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Explanations of vote2
dcterms:Language	"el"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20110215.22.2-391-500"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2011-02-15-Speech-2-391-7502
lpv:speaker	lp:Nikolaos Chountis2
lpv:spokenAs	member; Delegation for relations with Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Serbia, Montenegro and Kosovo (2009-09-16--2014-06-30)3 member; ECON (2009-07-16--2012-01-18)3 unknown; Coalition of the Radical Left (2009-07-14--2014-06-30)3 substitute; AFET (2009-07-16--2012-01-18)3 member_of_the_bureau; EUL/NGL (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; Delegation to the EU-Russia Parliamentary Cooperation Committee (2009-09-16--2014-06-30)3 substitute; Delegation to the EU-Ukraine Parliamentary Cooperation Committee (2009-09-16--2014-06-30)3 substitute; SEDE (2009-07-16--2012-01-18)3
lpv:translated text	"Bearing in mind that the three regulations on radiation amended by the report in question were adopted in the wake of Chernobyl about 20 years ago, I consider that the Belet report, as it now stands after the vote, is a first attempt to improve the approach to and update the problem of radioactive contamination of foodstuffs and the soil. Although I am in favour of the change to the legal basis and of strengthening the role of the European Parliament, in order to achieve greater transparency in legislation and broader protection for citizens, I consider the report to be inadequate and several steps behind what would be a substantive approach to the problem. It amends what has already been agreed and simply regulates the consequences, rather than the source, of the problem. Furthermore, it has left the maximum limits for radioactive contamination extremely high and, as a result, it is far removed from the objective of protecting public health. It is for the above reasons that I abstained in the final vote."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph