Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2011-07-07-Speech-4-234-250"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2011-07-07"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Explanations of vote2
dcterms:Language	"el"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20110707.17.4-234-250"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2011-07-07-Speech-4-234-5002
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	"To start with, I am opposed to the military nature of the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP) and the Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP). I voted against the resolution on parliamentary cooperation in this field for the following additional reasons: it limits the rights of national parliaments and real democratic control by the European and national parliaments of the entire European External Action Service, given that it has now become the executive body of the CFSP. As far as interparliamentary CFSP/CSDP ‘scrutiny’ meetings are concerned, the amendments by the Confederal Group of the European United Left – Nordic Green Left were rejected, amendments which introduced: a) the facility for the interparliamentary meeting to issue opinions; b) its right to approve binding conclusions/resolutions, especially on military and non-military missions, without limiting the national parliaments’ existing rights of scrutiny; c) its legal right to reject or approve each CFSP action and all military and non-military missions; d) its right to receive detailed information on every CFSP/CSDP mission planned, well before the Council passes any decision to start an operation; e) its right to submit questions and receive information; and f) its right to observe CFSP/CSDP actions by visiting current missions. Finally, the European and national parliaments are currently unable to scrutinise the ‘secret budgets’ of the CSDP (the ATHENA mechanism and the future start-up budget line)."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph