Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2016-10-27-Speech-4-496-000"

PredicateValue (sorted: default)
rdf:type
dcterms:Date
dcterms:Is Part Of
dcterms:Language
lpv:document identification number
"en.20161027.33.4-496-000"2
lpv:hasSubsequent
lpv:speaker
lpv:spoken text
"A Uachtaráin, táim i gcoinne an athrú ama seo le blianta fada anuas anois ach go dtí gur eagraigh Herbert Reul cruinniú cúpla seachtain ó shin agus fuaireamar ansin an fhianaise agus an díobháil a bhí an t-athrú ama seo á dhéanamh do shláinte, geilleagar agus mar sin de ní raibh mé in ann é a rá go hoscailte. Agus anois táim ag teacht anseo inniu agus freisin tá breis fianaise againn nach bhfuil aon mhaitheas leis an athrú ama seo agus ba chóir dúinn deireadh a chur leis agus a luaithe is a dhéanfaimid é is fearr. The Commission is right: we need a harmonised approach, and that means that only the Commission can bring about this change; Member States cannot do it individually. All the evidence is there now that this needs to happen. Why do we deny scientific evidence of social jetlag? Many people suffer as a result of the change of time, as if they had jetlag. Also health has been mentioned. Accidents, and this supposedly beneficial aspect from the point of view of climate change. There are no benefits. For me actually it happens next Saturday. Autumn will finish next Saturday; winter will be advanced by a month; it will come in overnight. People will stop going for walks in the afternoon. It is ok for Mr Tarabella to talk about floodlights; they are not available to most people, and, as well as that, the energy consumption will go up, and then next year, spring will be postponed by about a month, which has a huge impact in terms of social activity, games, sport – you name it. I was very interested in what one of our speakers mentioned: that 73% of Germans are against the change. I would say that reflects the feeling right across Europe, and, indeed if they had the evidence which we have got now here today, I think the figures would actually go up. So why won’t the Commission come forward with something that actually matters to citizens; that citizens are in favour of doing; that nobody can do for them, only the Commission, and they will get great praise for it. I think it is a no-brainer, as we say in English. I will give you another example. This Saturday, many of the hotels in my constituency will close for the winter. The season is over. Again, the evidence is there that the hotels and the bookings drop by over 7% or more as soon as we switch over. So if there was no changeover, if we had summertime all year round, everybody would benefit: health wise, socially, young people and the economy. So at least Commission: come forward with a proposal. If it fails, it fails, but I guarantee you it would be a success and you will get some praise for so doing."@en1
lpv:spokenAs
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata
lpv:videoURI

Named graphs describing this resource:

1http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/English.ttl.gz
2http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/Events_and_structure.ttl.gz
3http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/spokenAs.ttl.gz

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph