Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2012-07-04-Speech-3-191-000"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2012-07-04"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Explanations of vote2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20120704.25.3-191-000"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2012-07-04-Speech-3-193-0002
lpv:speaker	lp:Seán Kelly2
lpv:spokenAs	substitute; CULT (2012-01-19--2014-06-30)3 member; Delegation for relations with the United States (2009-09-16--2014-06-30)3 member; REGI (2012-01-19--2014-06-30)3 member; EPP (2009-07-14--2014-06-30)3 unknown; Fine Gael Party (2009-07-14--2014-06-30)3 substitute; Delegation for relations with Canada (2009-09-16--2014-06-30)3 substitute; ITRE (2012-01-19--2014-06-30)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, like Julie Girling and Charles Tannock, I voted first for this report to be cancelled and, when that was not accepted, I abstained at the final vote because I feel it is right and proper to wait until the Court of Justice of the European Union comes to a decision before we come to a decision here. Having said that, one thing I could not understand about this agreement is that it is supposed to be dealing with counterfeit goods, and as 95% of these goods are coming from China, and to a lesser extent India, and those countries are not a party to this agreement, I just wonder how effective it would have been anyway. When I asked this question I was told this was a ‘coalition of the willing’. I would say more a ‘coalition of the innocent’, and the guilty are let off scot-free. So now that we have a chance to go back to the drawing board we should first deal with China, and to a lesser extent India, in the area of counterfeit goods, which are costing us EUR 250 billion and hundreds of thousands of jobs, and then move on to other matters."@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