Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2012-03-15-Speech-4-228-000"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2012-03-15"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Explanations of vote2
dcterms:Language	"pl"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20120315.19.4-228-000"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2012-03-15-Speech-4-229-0002
lpv:speaker	lp:Adam Gierek2
lpv:spokenAs	member; S&D (2009-07-14--2014-06-30)3 member; Delegation to the EU-Russia Parliamentary Cooperation Committee (2009-09-16--2014-06-30)3 unknown; Unia Pracy (2009-07-14--2014-06-30)3 substitute; Delegation for relations with Australia and New Zealand (2009-09-16--2014-06-30)3 member; ITRE (2012-01-19--2014-06-30)3 substitute; ENVI (2012-01-19--2014-06-30)3
lpv:translated text	"Measures leading to a low-emission economy should be based on realistic assumptions and not on the ambitions of European bureaucrats or declarations forced on us by lobby groups. This resolution is a typical example of such a negative approach. It is one thing to force people to use sustainable energy, which I support, or to force through clean and safe nuclear energy, which I also support. However, to speak of a low or nil-emission economy without any economic vision for the EU countries between now and 2050, without any ideas for the use of readily-available and cheap alternative energy sources and also without any idea of future consumption models is naïve and simplistic. I would suggest that the Commission employ science fiction writers for this purpose and not the European Parliament. This ridiculous proposal has no practical future, unless one includes throughout it some climatic equity, meaning a breakdown of the climate burden on the level of the world and the Union based on a per capita CO emission limit. Since this is not the case, I voted ‘no’. Thank you."@en1
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata	"2"1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph