Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2012-11-20-Speech-2-490-000"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2012-11-20"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Environmental impacts of shale gas and shale oil extraction activities - Industrial, energy and other aspects of shale gas and oil (debate)2
dcterms:Language	"es"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20121120.31.2-490-000"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2012-11-20-Speech-2-491-0002
lpv:speaker	lp:Pilar del Castillo Vera2
lpv:spokenAs	member_of_the_bureau; EPP (2009-07-24--2014-06-30)3 member; Delegation for relations with India (2009-09-16--2014-06-30)3 substitute; Delegation to the EU-Croatia Joint Parliamentary Committee (2009-09-16--2013-06-30)3 member; ITRE (2012-01-19--2014-06-30)3 unknown; Partido Popular (2009-07-14--2014-06-30)3 substitute; ECON (2012-01-19--2014-06-30)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, Commissioners, ladies and gentlemen, what we are debating today are two reports: one by the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety and another by the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy. The aim of these reports is, among other things, to convey to the Commission Parliament’s views on shale gas so that at a later date, as the Commissioner for the Environment, Mr Potočnik, has said, the Commission can present a report on a series of measures relating to this energy source to enable harmonised action within the European Union. I believe that both rapporteurs have put forward the points of view of the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety and the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy in a very reasonable manner. Logically their perspectives are not exactly the same. In the case of the two Commissioners, they have set out their vision with a great deal of balance and in a measured way, which is essential for any debate such as this to take place. Someone said before I took the floor that one cannot debate using emotions and when emotions are running high. I ask you who can name or talk about a single energy source that does not carry risks and opportunities for developing the benefits that it brings. The same applies to this one. If humanity had rejected every advance, every encounter, every discovery of the possibility of developing an energy source solely due to the risks that it carried, we would have made no progress at all. We have to insist much more that the technology is as good as possible, that there is investment into research and that this new source of energy can be developed, with all the guarantees in place, in a measured way and without emotion."@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