Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2011-05-10-Speech-2-423-875"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20110510.60.2-423-875"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"As it is required to do each year, the European Parliament has been asked for a decision on whether the Union budget has been properly implemented by the various agencies and institutions who are responsible for it. The sums are allocated for specific purposes and the aim of the discharge procedure is to check in retrospect that these purposes have been adhered to. This is an important prerogative of Parliament, as illustrated for example by its influence on the resignation of the Santer Commission in 1999. This year, together with the vast majority of Members of the European Parliament, I refused to grant the European Medicines Agency discharge in respect of its activity in the 2009 financial year This is because the independence of experts recruited to perform scientific assessments on medicines for human use has not been properly guaranteed. For example, doubts still remain about possible conflicts of interest in relation to the assessment of the appetite suppressant benfluorex. The agency’s procurement procedures and criteria for recruiting staff have also attracted criticism. While the Mediator scandal prompts us to reinforce our precautions before allowing medicines to be placed on the market, the serious malfunctioning of the European Medicines Agency must be penalised."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples