Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2007-04-23-Speech-1-145"

PredicateValue (sorted: default)
rdf:type
dcterms:Date
dcterms:Is Part Of
dcterms:Language
lpv:document identification number
"en.20070423.18.1-145"6
lpv:hasSubsequent
lpv:speaker
lpv:spoken text
"Mr President, it is 2007, so you can address me as ‘Miss’! I would also like to congratulate my colleague Mr Zingaretti, although he knows that we agree to disagree on this issue. The legal base of the proposal derives from the Court of Justice. The Commission interprets this ruling to be applicable beyond the case, and sees this ruling as a legal base for the harmonisation of certain criminal sanctions in measures aimed at protecting the internal market. The reason I consider rejection of this directive as a whole is not because I do not believe in expanding the powers of the EU to include criminal sanctions. I do believe in that. However, I have serious doubts about the process leading to this increase of power, because a legal base is not the same as a political mandate. Fundamental steps like this demand a thorough political debate and a clear choice on the matter in question. Instead, we are about to take a great leap forward as a by-product of a single policy measure in a highly specialised and limited field. I do not think this is the best way of pushing integration forward. It also enforces the popular opinion held by many who see the European Union as an organisation which caters mainly for the interests of big businesses, which is not the case."@en4
lpv:spokenAs
lpv:translated text
"Mr President, it is 2007, so you can address me as ‘Miss’! I would also like to congratulate my colleague Mr Zingaretti, although he knows that we agree to disagree on this issue. The legal base of the proposal derives from the Court of Justice. The Commission interprets this ruling to be applicable beyond the case, and sees this ruling as a legal base for the harmonisation of certain criminal sanctions in measures aimed at protecting the internal market. The reason I consider rejection of this directive as a whole is not because I do not believe in expanding the powers of the EU to include criminal sanctions. I do believe in that. However, I have serious doubts about the process leading to this increase of power, because a legal base is not the same as a political mandate. Fundamental steps like this demand a thorough political debate and a clear choice on the matter in question. Instead, we are about to take a great leap forward as a by-product of a single policy measure in a highly specialised and limited field. I do not think this is the best way of pushing integration forward. It also enforces the popular opinion held by many who see the European Union as an organisation which caters mainly for the interests of big businesses, which is not the case."@cs1
"Hr. formand! Vi lever i 2007, så De må gerne tiltale mig "frøken"! Jeg vil også gerne lykønske min kollega, hr. Zingaretti, selv om han ved, at vi er enige om at være uenige om dette spørgsmål. Forslagets retsgrundlag er en afgørelse fra Domstolen. Kommissionen fortolker denne afgørelse, således at den også kan finde anvendelse på andre sager, og betragter denne afgørelse som retsgrundlag for harmonisering af visse strafferetlige sanktioner med henblik på at beskytte det indre marked. Årsagen til, at jeg overvejer at forkaste dette direktiv som helhed, er ikke, at jeg er imod en udvidelse af EU's beføjelser til at omfatte strafferetlige sanktioner. Det er jeg ikke. Jeg er imidlertid meget bekymret over den proces, der ligger til grund for udvidelsen af beføjelserne, da et retsgrundlag ikke er det samme som et politisk mandat. Vigtige skridt af denne art skal være baseret på en dybtgående politisk debat og et klart valg på det pågældende område. Vi er i stedet ved at tage et stort skridt fremad i forbindelse med vedtagelsen af en enkelt politisk foranstaltning på et meget specialiseret og begrænset område. Jeg mener ikke, at dette er den bedste fremgangsmåde, hvis vi ønsker at fremme integrationen. Den styrker også den almindelig udbredte holdning, at EU er et organ, der primært søger at imødekomme de store virksomheders interesser, hvilket ikke er tilfældet."@da2
"Herr Präsident! Wir haben das Jahr 2007, und somit können Sie mich mit „Frau“ ansprechen! Auch ich möchte meinem Kollegen Herrn Zingaretti meinen Glückwunsch aussprechen, auch wenn er weiß, dass wir in dieser Frage unterschiedlicher Meinung sind. Die Rechtsgrundlage des Vorschlags geht auf ein Urteil des Gerichtshofs zurück. Die Kommission legt diese Gerichtsentscheidung als über diese konkrete Rechtssache hinaus anwendbar aus, und sie betrachtet sie als Rechtsgrundlage für die Harmonisierung bestimmter strafrechtlicher Maßnahmen zum Schutz des Binnenmarktes. Der Grund, weshalb ich eine Ablehnung dieser Richtlinie insgesamt erwäge, liegt nicht etwa darin, dass ich nicht für eine Ausweitung der Befugnisse der EU auf strafrechtliche Maßnahmen wäre. Dafür bin ich schon. Ich habe jedoch ernste Bedenken wegen der Verfahrensweise, die zu dieser Erweiterung der Befugnisse führt, denn eine Rechtsgrundlage ist nicht das Gleiche wie ein politisches Mandat. Grundlegende Schritte wie dieser verlangen eine gründliche politische Aussprache und eine eindeutige Entscheidung über das anstehende Problem. Stattdessen sind wir dabei, im Ergebnis einer einzigen politischen Maßnahme auf einem höchst spezialisierten und begrenzten Gebiet einen großen Sprung nach vorn zu vollziehen. Meiner Meinung nach ist das nicht der beste Weg, um die Integration voranzubringen. Außerdem leistet es dem weit verbreiteten, von vielen vertretenen Standpunkt Vorschub, die Europäische Union sei eine Organisation, die sich hauptsächlich um die Interessen des Großkapitals kümmert, was aber nicht der Fall ist."@de9
"Κύριε Πρόεδρε, είμαστε στο 2007, οπότε μπορείτε να με προσφωνείτε ως «δεσποινίς»! Θέλω επίσης να συγχαρώ τον συνάδελφό μου κ. Zingaretti, παρόλο που γνωρίζει ότι συμφωνούμε πως διαφωνούμε σε αυτό το θέμα. Η νομική βάση της πρότασης απορρέει από το Δικαστήριο. Η ερμηνεία που δίνει η Επιτροπή σε αυτήν την απόφαση είναι ότι είναι εφαρμοστέα πέραν της υπόθεσης, ενώ θεωρεί ότι η απόφαση αποτελεί νομική βάση για την εναρμόνιση ορισμένων ποινικών κυρώσεων σε μέτρα που αποσκοπούν στην προστασία της εσωτερικής αγοράς. Ο λόγος για τον οποίο εξετάζω το ενδεχόμενο απόρριψης της οδηγίας στο σύνολό της δεν είναι επειδή δεν πιστεύω στη διεύρυνση των αρμοδιοτήτων της ΕΕ, ώστε να περιλαμβάνει τις ποινικές κυρώσεις. Πιστεύω όντως σε αυτό. Εντούτοις, διατηρώ σοβαρές επιφυλάξεις ως προς τη διαδικασία που οδηγεί σε αυτήν τη διεύρυνση αρμοδιοτήτων, επειδή μια νομική βάση δεν είναι ίδια με μια πολιτική εντολή. Θεμελιώδη βήματα, όπως αυτά, απαιτούν διεξοδικό πολιτικό διάλογο και σαφή επιλογή για το εν λόγω θέμα. Αντίθετα, πρόκειται να πραγματοποιήσουμε ένα τεράστιο άλμα προς τα εμπρός ως παραπροϊόν ενός μέτρου ενιαίας πολιτικής σε έναν άκρως εξειδικευμένο και περιορισμένο τομέα. Δεν πιστεύω ότι αυτός είναι ο καλύτερος τρόπος για την προώθηση της ολοκλήρωσης. Ενισχύει άλλωστε τη δημοφιλή άποψη που συμμερίζονται πολλοί που θεωρούν την ΕΕ έναν οργανισμό που εξυπηρετεί κυρίως τα συμφέροντα των μεγάλων επιχειρήσεων, κάτι το οποίο δεν ισχύει."@el10
"Señor Presidente, estamos en 2007, así que puede llamarme «señorita». También me gustaría felicitar a mi colega, el señor Zingaretti, aunque sabe que acordamos discrepar en esta cuestión. El fundamento jurídico de la propuesta procede del Tribunal de Justicia. La Comisión interpreta que esta sentencia es aplicable al caso y la considera un fundamento jurídico para la armonización de determinadas sanciones penales en medidas destinadas a proteger el mercado interior. El motivo por el que pienso que hay que rechazar esta Directiva en su totalidad no es que no crea en la ampliación de competencias de la UE a fin de incluir las sanciones penales. Sí que creo en ella. Sin embargo, tengo serias dudas sobre el proceso que conduce a esta ampliación de competencias, porque un fundamento jurídico no es lo mismo que un mandato político. Pasos fundamentales como este exigen un análisis político profundo y una elección clara sobre el tema en cuestión. En cambio, estamos a punto de dar un gran paso adelante en forma de subproducto de una medida política única en un campo muy especializado y limitado. No creo que esta sea la mejor forma de fomentar la integración. También refuerza la creencia popular defendida por muchos que conciben la Unión Europea como una organización que vela principalmente por los intereses de las grandes empresas, lo que no es cierto."@es21
"Mr President, it is 2007, so you can address me as ‘Miss’! I would also like to congratulate my colleague Mr Zingaretti, although he knows that we agree to disagree on this issue. The legal base of the proposal derives from the Court of Justice. The Commission interprets this ruling to be applicable beyond the case, and sees this ruling as a legal base for the harmonisation of certain criminal sanctions in measures aimed at protecting the internal market. The reason I consider rejection of this directive as a whole is not because I do not believe in expanding the powers of the EU to include criminal sanctions. I do believe in that. However, I have serious doubts about the process leading to this increase of power, because a legal base is not the same as a political mandate. Fundamental steps like this demand a thorough political debate and a clear choice on the matter in question. Instead, we are about to take a great leap forward as a by-product of a single policy measure in a highly specialised and limited field. I do not think this is the best way of pushing integration forward. It also enforces the popular opinion held by many who see the European Union as an organisation which caters mainly for the interests of big businesses, which is not the case."@et5
"Arvoisa puhemies, on vuosi 2007, joten voitte puhutella minua neidiksi! Lisäksi haluan kiittää kollegaani Zingarettia, vaikka hän tietää meidän olevan yksimielisiä erimielisyydestämme. Ehdotuksen oikeusperusta on peräisin yhteisöjen tuomioistuimelta. Komission tulkinnan mukaan tämän ratkaisun soveltamista ei ole rajattu pelkästään kyseiseen tapaukseen, ja se katsoo tämän ratkaisun muodostavan oikeusperustan tiettyjen rikosoikeudellisten seuraamusten yhdenmukaistamiselle sisämarkkinoiden turvaamiseen tähtäävien toimenpiteiden yhteydessä. Syy siihen, miksi harkitsen tämän direktiivin hylkäämistä kokonaisuudessaan, ei ole se, etten uskoisi EU:n toimivallan laajentamiseen rikosoikeudellisten seuraamusten alalle. Uskon kyllä tähän laajentamiseen. Suhtaudun kuitenkin hyvin epäilevästi prosessiin, jolla toimivallan lisäämistä kohti edetään, koska oikeusperusta ei ole yhtä kuin poliittinen valtuutus. Tämänkaltaiset perustavanlaatuiset toimet edellyttävät perusteellista poliittista keskustelua ja selkeän päätöksen tekemistä kyseessä olevassa asiassa. Olemme sen sijaan aikeissa ottaa suuren askeleen pitkälle erikoistuneella ja rajoitetulla alalla yksittäisen poliittisen toimenpiteen oheistuotteena. Mielestäni tämä ei ole paras tapa viedä yhdentymistä eteenpäin. Lisäksi se voimistaa kansalaisten keskuudessa yleistä käsitystä siitä, että Euroopan unioni on pääasiassa suuryritysten etuja palveleva organisaatio, mikä ei ole totta."@fi7
"Monsieur le Président, nous sommes en 2007 et vous pouvez donc m’appeler «Mademoiselle»! Je félicite également M. Zingaretti, même s’il sait que nous sommes d’accord pour dire que nous sommes en désaccord sur cette question. La base juridique de la proposition vient de la Cour de justice. La Commission interprète cet arrêt en lui trouvant une applicabilité au-delà de l’affaire en cause et voit en lui une base juridique pour l’harmonisation de certaines sanctions pénales par le biais de mesures destinées à protéger le marché intérieur. La raison pour laquelle j’envisage de rejeter globalement cette directive n’est pas que je ne croie pas à une extension des pouvoirs de l’UE permettant d’inclure des sanctions pénales. J’y crois. Par contre, j’ai de sérieux doutes quant au processus qui mène à cet accroissement de pouvoir, parce qu’une base juridique n’est pas la même chose qu’un mandat politique. Une décision aussi fondamentale que celle-ci exige un débat politique approfondi et des choix clairs sur le sujet en cause. Au lieu de cela, nous sommes sur le point de foncer sur un dérivé d’une mesure politique unique dans un domaine hautement spécialisé et très restreint. Je ne pense pas que ce soit la meilleure manière de progresser en matière d’intégration. Cela renforce par ailleurs l’opinion de nombreux citoyens qui voient l’Union européenne comme une organisation qui se préoccupe surtout des intérêts des grandes entreprises, alors que ce n’est pas le cas."@fr8
"Mr President, it is 2007, so you can address me as ‘Miss’! I would also like to congratulate my colleague Mr Zingaretti, although he knows that we agree to disagree on this issue. The legal base of the proposal derives from the Court of Justice. The Commission interprets this ruling to be applicable beyond the case, and sees this ruling as a legal base for the harmonisation of certain criminal sanctions in measures aimed at protecting the internal market. The reason I consider rejection of this directive as a whole is not because I do not believe in expanding the powers of the EU to include criminal sanctions. I do believe in that. However, I have serious doubts about the process leading to this increase of power, because a legal base is not the same as a political mandate. Fundamental steps like this demand a thorough political debate and a clear choice on the matter in question. Instead, we are about to take a great leap forward as a by-product of a single policy measure in a highly specialised and limited field. I do not think this is the best way of pushing integration forward. It also enforces the popular opinion held by many who see the European Union as an organisation which caters mainly for the interests of big businesses, which is not the case."@hu11
"Signor Presidente, siamo nel 2007, quindi può anche chiamarmi “signorina”! Desidero inoltre porgere le mie congratulazioni al collega, onorevole Zingaretti, benché egli conosca la nostra intenzione di dissentire sull’argomento. La base giuridica della proposta deriva dalla Corte di giustizia. Secondo l’interpretazione della Commissione, la sentenza è applicabile al di là del caso specifico e costituisce la base giuridica per l’armonizzazione di talune sanzioni penali nell’ambito di misure atte a proteggere il mercato interno. Propongo di respingere integralmente questa direttiva non perché io non creda nell’espansione dei poteri dell’UE fino ad abbracciare le sanzioni penali. Ci credo, eccome! Tuttavia, nutro seri dubbi sul processo che determina questo aumento dei poteri, poiché base giuridica non è sinonimo di mandato politico. Passi decisivi come questi richiedono un dibattito politico minuzioso e una scelta chiara sulla materia in questione. Invece ci apprestiamo a compiere un grande balzo in avanti mediante un sottoprodotto di un’unica misura politica in un campo altamente specializzato e limitato. Non credo sia il modo migliore per far progredire l’integrazione. In questo modo si corrobora anche l’opinione molto diffusa secondo cui l’Unione europea è un’organizzazione che è essenzialmente al servizio degli interessi delle grandi imprese, il che non è affatto vero."@it12
"Mr President, it is 2007, so you can address me as ‘Miss’! I would also like to congratulate my colleague Mr Zingaretti, although he knows that we agree to disagree on this issue. The legal base of the proposal derives from the Court of Justice. The Commission interprets this ruling to be applicable beyond the case, and sees this ruling as a legal base for the harmonisation of certain criminal sanctions in measures aimed at protecting the internal market. The reason I consider rejection of this directive as a whole is not because I do not believe in expanding the powers of the EU to include criminal sanctions. I do believe in that. However, I have serious doubts about the process leading to this increase of power, because a legal base is not the same as a political mandate. Fundamental steps like this demand a thorough political debate and a clear choice on the matter in question. Instead, we are about to take a great leap forward as a by-product of a single policy measure in a highly specialised and limited field. I do not think this is the best way of pushing integration forward. It also enforces the popular opinion held by many who see the European Union as an organisation which caters mainly for the interests of big businesses, which is not the case."@lt14
"Mr President, it is 2007, so you can address me as ‘Miss’! I would also like to congratulate my colleague Mr Zingaretti, although he knows that we agree to disagree on this issue. The legal base of the proposal derives from the Court of Justice. The Commission interprets this ruling to be applicable beyond the case, and sees this ruling as a legal base for the harmonisation of certain criminal sanctions in measures aimed at protecting the internal market. The reason I consider rejection of this directive as a whole is not because I do not believe in expanding the powers of the EU to include criminal sanctions. I do believe in that. However, I have serious doubts about the process leading to this increase of power, because a legal base is not the same as a political mandate. Fundamental steps like this demand a thorough political debate and a clear choice on the matter in question. Instead, we are about to take a great leap forward as a by-product of a single policy measure in a highly specialised and limited field. I do not think this is the best way of pushing integration forward. It also enforces the popular opinion held by many who see the European Union as an organisation which caters mainly for the interests of big businesses, which is not the case."@lv13
"Mr President, it is 2007, so you can address me as ‘Miss’! I would also like to congratulate my colleague Mr Zingaretti, although he knows that we agree to disagree on this issue. The legal base of the proposal derives from the Court of Justice. The Commission interprets this ruling to be applicable beyond the case, and sees this ruling as a legal base for the harmonisation of certain criminal sanctions in measures aimed at protecting the internal market. The reason I consider rejection of this directive as a whole is not because I do not believe in expanding the powers of the EU to include criminal sanctions. I do believe in that. However, I have serious doubts about the process leading to this increase of power, because a legal base is not the same as a political mandate. Fundamental steps like this demand a thorough political debate and a clear choice on the matter in question. Instead, we are about to take a great leap forward as a by-product of a single policy measure in a highly specialised and limited field. I do not think this is the best way of pushing integration forward. It also enforces the popular opinion held by many who see the European Union as an organisation which caters mainly for the interests of big businesses, which is not the case."@mt15
"Mijnheer de Voorzitter, het is 2007, dus u mag mij aanspreken als ‘mejuffrouw’! Ik wil ook mijn collega de heer Zingaretti feliciteren, hoewel hij weet dat wij het erover eens zijn dat we het over deze zaak oneens zijn. De wettelijke grondslag van het voorstel is door het Hof van Justitie gelegd. De Commissie acht de uitspraak van het Hof ook toepasbaar op delicten die niet tot de zaak in kwestie behoren en beschouwt de uitspraak als een wettelijke grondslag voor het harmoniseren van bepaalde strafrechtelijke sancties bij maatregelen die gericht zijn op het beschermen van de interne markt. Als ik overweeg om tegen deze richtlijn als geheel te stemmen, doe ik dat niet omdat ik niet geloof in het uitbreiden van de machtsmiddelen van de EU met strafrechtelijke sancties. Daar geloof ik namelijk wel in. Ik heb echter ernstige twijfels over het proces dat tot deze machtstoename leidt, aangezien een wettelijke grondslag niet hetzelfde is als een politiek mandaat. Fundamentele stappen zoals deze vragen om een grondig politiek debat en een duidelijke keuze over de zaak in kwestie. In plaats daarvan is de grote sprong voorwaarts die we gaan doen het nevenproduct van één enkele beleidsmaatregel op een zeer gespecialiseerd en beperkt terrein. Dat lijkt me niet de beste manier om de integratie te bevorderen. Bovendien is het weer koren op de molen van al die mensen die de Europese Unie als een organisatie zien die vooral de belangen van de grote bedrijven dient, wat niet het geval is."@nl3
"Mr President, it is 2007, so you can address me as ‘Miss’! I would also like to congratulate my colleague Mr Zingaretti, although he knows that we agree to disagree on this issue. The legal base of the proposal derives from the Court of Justice. The Commission interprets this ruling to be applicable beyond the case, and sees this ruling as a legal base for the harmonisation of certain criminal sanctions in measures aimed at protecting the internal market. The reason I consider rejection of this directive as a whole is not because I do not believe in expanding the powers of the EU to include criminal sanctions. I do believe in that. However, I have serious doubts about the process leading to this increase of power, because a legal base is not the same as a political mandate. Fundamental steps like this demand a thorough political debate and a clear choice on the matter in question. Instead, we are about to take a great leap forward as a by-product of a single policy measure in a highly specialised and limited field. I do not think this is the best way of pushing integration forward. It also enforces the popular opinion held by many who see the European Union as an organisation which caters mainly for the interests of big businesses, which is not the case."@pl16
"Senhor Presidente, estamos em 2007, por isso pode tratar-me por "Menina"! Queria felicitar também o meu colega senhor deputado Zingaretti, embora ele saiba que concordamos em discordar nesta matéria. A proposta tem por base jurídica um acórdão do Tribunal de Justiça. A Comissão considera-o aplicável para lá do âmbito do processo concreto a que respeita e toma-o como base jurídica para a harmonização de determinadas sanções penais mediante um conjunto de medidas destinadas a proteger o mercado interno. O que me leva a ponderar a rejeição desta directiva na generalidade não é o não ser partidária do alargamento das competências da UE ao campo das sanções penais. Sou favorável a ele. Contudo, tenho sérias dúvidas acerca do processo que conduz a este aumento de competências, porque base jurídica não é o mesmo que mandato político. Passos fundamentais como este requerem um debate político em profundidade e uma decisão clara sobre o assunto em apreço. Em lugar disso, preparamo-nos para dar um grande salto em frente no quadro de uma medida avulsa de política num campo altamente especializado e circunscrito. Não me parece que seja a melhor maneira de levar avante a integração. Reforça também a opinião assaz divulgada de muita gente, que vê na União Europeia uma organização que está ao serviço, principalmente, dos interesses das grandes empresas, o que não é o caso."@pt17
"Mr President, it is 2007, so you can address me as ‘Miss’! I would also like to congratulate my colleague Mr Zingaretti, although he knows that we agree to disagree on this issue. The legal base of the proposal derives from the Court of Justice. The Commission interprets this ruling to be applicable beyond the case, and sees this ruling as a legal base for the harmonisation of certain criminal sanctions in measures aimed at protecting the internal market. The reason I consider rejection of this directive as a whole is not because I do not believe in expanding the powers of the EU to include criminal sanctions. I do believe in that. However, I have serious doubts about the process leading to this increase of power, because a legal base is not the same as a political mandate. Fundamental steps like this demand a thorough political debate and a clear choice on the matter in question. Instead, we are about to take a great leap forward as a by-product of a single policy measure in a highly specialised and limited field. I do not think this is the best way of pushing integration forward. It also enforces the popular opinion held by many who see the European Union as an organisation which caters mainly for the interests of big businesses, which is not the case."@ro18
"Mr President, it is 2007, so you can address me as ‘Miss’! I would also like to congratulate my colleague Mr Zingaretti, although he knows that we agree to disagree on this issue. The legal base of the proposal derives from the Court of Justice. The Commission interprets this ruling to be applicable beyond the case, and sees this ruling as a legal base for the harmonisation of certain criminal sanctions in measures aimed at protecting the internal market. The reason I consider rejection of this directive as a whole is not because I do not believe in expanding the powers of the EU to include criminal sanctions. I do believe in that. However, I have serious doubts about the process leading to this increase of power, because a legal base is not the same as a political mandate. Fundamental steps like this demand a thorough political debate and a clear choice on the matter in question. Instead, we are about to take a great leap forward as a by-product of a single policy measure in a highly specialised and limited field. I do not think this is the best way of pushing integration forward. It also enforces the popular opinion held by many who see the European Union as an organisation which caters mainly for the interests of big businesses, which is not the case."@sk19
"Mr President, it is 2007, so you can address me as ‘Miss’! I would also like to congratulate my colleague Mr Zingaretti, although he knows that we agree to disagree on this issue. The legal base of the proposal derives from the Court of Justice. The Commission interprets this ruling to be applicable beyond the case, and sees this ruling as a legal base for the harmonisation of certain criminal sanctions in measures aimed at protecting the internal market. The reason I consider rejection of this directive as a whole is not because I do not believe in expanding the powers of the EU to include criminal sanctions. I do believe in that. However, I have serious doubts about the process leading to this increase of power, because a legal base is not the same as a political mandate. Fundamental steps like this demand a thorough political debate and a clear choice on the matter in question. Instead, we are about to take a great leap forward as a by-product of a single policy measure in a highly specialised and limited field. I do not think this is the best way of pushing integration forward. It also enforces the popular opinion held by many who see the European Union as an organisation which caters mainly for the interests of big businesses, which is not the case."@sl20
"Herr talman! Det är 2007 så ni kan kalla mig ”miss”! Jag vill också gratulera min kollega Nicola Zingaretti, även om han vet att vi är överens om att vi inte kan enas om denna fråga. Den rättsliga grunden för förslaget kommer från EG-domstolen. Kommissionen tolkar denna dom som tillämplig utöver målet och ser domen som en rättslig grund för harmonisering av vissa straffrättsliga påföljder i åtgärder för att skydda den inre marknaden. Anledningen till att jag överväger att avvisa detta direktiv som helhet är inte att jag inte håller med om att EU:s befogenheter bör utökas till att omfatta straffrättsliga påföljder. Det tror jag på. Jag tvivlar dock starkt på förfarandet för att utöka dessa befogenheter eftersom en rättslig grund inte är detsamma som ett politiskt mandat. Viktiga åtgärder som denna kräver en ingående politisk debatt och tydliga valmöjligheter. I stället är vi på väg att ta ett stort kliv framåt som en bieffekt av en gemensam politisk åtgärd på ett mycket specialiserat och avgränsat område. Jag anser inte att detta är det bästa sättet att främja integration. Det underblåser även den allmänna uppfattningen om att EU är ett organ som framför allt ser till de stora företagens intressen, vilket inte alltid är fallet."@sv22
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata
"Edith Mastenbroek (PSE ). –"18,5,20,15,1,19,14,16,11,13,4

Named graphs describing this resource:

1http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/Czech.ttl.gz
2http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/Danish.ttl.gz
3http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/Dutch.ttl.gz
4http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/English.ttl.gz
5http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/Estonian.ttl.gz
6http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/Events_and_structure.ttl.gz
7http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/Finnish.ttl.gz
8http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/French.ttl.gz
9http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/German.ttl.gz
10http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/Greek.ttl.gz
11http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/Hungarian.ttl.gz
12http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/Italian.ttl.gz
13http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/Latvian.ttl.gz
14http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/Lithuanian.ttl.gz
15http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/Maltese.ttl.gz
16http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/Polish.ttl.gz
17http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/Portuguese.ttl.gz
18http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/Romanian.ttl.gz
19http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/Slovak.ttl.gz
20http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/Slovenian.ttl.gz
21http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/Spanish.ttl.gz
22http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/Swedish.ttl.gz
23http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/spokenAs.ttl.gz

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph