Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2012-07-03-Speech-2-695-000"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2012-07-03"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Common rules for direct support schemes for farmers - Support for rural development by the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development - Common organisation of agricultural markets and specific provisions for certain agricultural products - Financing of the common agricultural policy - Organic production and labelling of organic products - System of financing by the European Agricultural Guarantee Fund (debate)2
dcterms:Language	"pt"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20120703.26.2-695-000"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2012-07-03-Speech-2-696-0002
lpv:speaker	lp:Maria do Céu Patrão Neves2
lpv:spokenAs	member; EPP (2009-07-14--2014-06-30)3,3 unknown; Partido Social Democrata (2009-07-14--2014-06-30)3,3 substitute; AGRI (2012-01-19--2014-06-30)3,3 member; PECH (2012-01-19--2014-06-30)3,3 member; Delegation for relations with Canada (2009-09-16--2014-06-30)3,3 substitute; Delegation to the ACP-EU Joint Parliamentary Assembly (2009-09-16--2014-06-30)3,3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, Commissioner, as shadow rapporteur for the regulation on organic production and labelling of organic products, I would congratulate Mr Häusling on the balanced way in which he led the trialogue on its necessary alignment with the Treaty of Lisbon, in particular, regarding implementing acts or delegated acts, the very issue which delayed reaching a consensus. The Council remains unwavering with regard to Articles 16 and 21, claiming that authorisation on specific substances constitutes an implementing act, and not a delegated act, as Parliament legitimately claims, based on Article 290(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union. The Commission began by supporting Parliament’s claim, but then adopted the position of the Council. To break the deadlock, Parliament proposed that a list of substances be inserted in the annex to the basic act, which was also rejected. The bulk of Parliament’s other proposals were consensual. In this context, and because the dispute that occurred in this trialogue is common to other reports by Parliament, it is important to progress to voting for the plenary at first reading, even without consensus, in order to demonstrate our determination in this matter and gain support and political strength for today and for the future. Second, it is important to promote a solution to this recurring problem at the highest level of Parliament, as it is a problem for various Parliament committees and burdensome for the public."@en1
lpv:videoURI	<go to Events_and_structure europarl>2

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph