Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2012-07-02-Speech-1-087-000"

PredicateValue (sorted: default)
rdf:type
dcterms:Date
dcterms:Is Part Of
dcterms:Language
lpv:document identification number
"en.20120702.18.1-087-000"6
lpv:hasSubsequent
lpv:speaker
lpv:spoken text
"Mr President, a number of amendments have raised serious concerns inside the British freight industry. Amendment 136 seeks to broaden the reach of the legislation by altering the weight threshold for vehicles subject to regulation, in some cases, bringing it down to one-and-a-half tonnes. This brings millions of vans into the remit without any recourse to an impact assessment. It would bankrupt small businesses up and down the UK which are reliant upon such vehicles and do not have the resources to accommodate such a regulation. Similarly, Amendment 134 alters the weight limit down to 2.8 tonnes. Whilst companies in Germany operate under such limits, the UK does not. It broadens the scope of the legislation enormously, again without adequate justification. Many representatives of the UK freight and haulage industry strongly oppose plans to prevent operators carrying out their own tachograph calibration. It is right that this amendment be lifted, and I hope that it stays out of future proposals. Today’s proposals establish far-reaching surveillance that goes beyond anything anticipated or justified. I fear that permitting these amendments could pave the way for Brussels to roll out similar levels of monitoring and enforcement for other road users and in other industries."@en4
lpv:spokenAs
lpv:translated text
"Mr President, a number of amendments have raised serious concerns inside the British freight industry. Amendment 136 seeks to broaden the reach of the legislation by altering the weight threshold for vehicles subject to regulation, in some cases bringing it down to one-and-a-half tonnes. This brings millions of vans into the remit without any recourse to an impact assessment. It would bankrupt small businesses up and down the UK which are reliant upon such vehicles and do not have the resources to accommodate such a regulation. Similarly, Amendment 134 alters the weight limit down to 2.8 tonnes. Whilst companies in Germany operate under such limits, the UK does not. It broadens the scope of the legislation enormously, again without adequate justification. Many representatives of the UK freight and haulage industry strongly oppose plans to prevent operators carrying out their own tachograph calibration. It is right that this amendment be lifted, and I hope that it stays out of future proposals. Today’s proposals establish far-reaching surveillance that goes beyond anything anticipated or justified. I fear that permitting these amendments could pave the way for Brussels to roll out similar levels of monitoring and enforcement for other road users and in other industries."@cs1
"Mr President, a number of amendments have raised serious concerns inside the British freight industry. Amendment 136 seeks to broaden the reach of the legislation by altering the weight threshold for vehicles subject to regulation, in some cases bringing it down to one-and-a-half tonnes. This brings millions of vans into the remit without any recourse to an impact assessment. It would bankrupt small businesses up and down the UK which are reliant upon such vehicles and do not have the resources to accommodate such a regulation. Similarly, Amendment 134 alters the weight limit down to 2.8 tonnes. Whilst companies in Germany operate under such limits, the UK does not. It broadens the scope of the legislation enormously, again without adequate justification. Many representatives of the UK freight and haulage industry strongly oppose plans to prevent operators carrying out their own tachograph calibration. It is right that this amendment be lifted, and I hope that it stays out of future proposals. Today’s proposals establish far-reaching surveillance that goes beyond anything anticipated or justified. I fear that permitting these amendments could pave the way for Brussels to roll out similar levels of monitoring and enforcement for other road users and in other industries."@da2
"Mr President, a number of amendments have raised serious concerns inside the British freight industry. Amendment 136 seeks to broaden the reach of the legislation by altering the weight threshold for vehicles subject to regulation, in some cases bringing it down to one-and-a-half tonnes. This brings millions of vans into the remit without any recourse to an impact assessment. It would bankrupt small businesses up and down the UK which are reliant upon such vehicles and do not have the resources to accommodate such a regulation. Similarly, Amendment 134 alters the weight limit down to 2.8 tonnes. Whilst companies in Germany operate under such limits, the UK does not. It broadens the scope of the legislation enormously, again without adequate justification. Many representatives of the UK freight and haulage industry strongly oppose plans to prevent operators carrying out their own tachograph calibration. It is right that this amendment be lifted, and I hope that it stays out of future proposals. Today’s proposals establish far-reaching surveillance that goes beyond anything anticipated or justified. I fear that permitting these amendments could pave the way for Brussels to roll out similar levels of monitoring and enforcement for other road users and in other industries."@de9
"Mr President, a number of amendments have raised serious concerns inside the British freight industry. Amendment 136 seeks to broaden the reach of the legislation by altering the weight threshold for vehicles subject to regulation, in some cases bringing it down to one-and-a-half tonnes. This brings millions of vans into the remit without any recourse to an impact assessment. It would bankrupt small businesses up and down the UK which are reliant upon such vehicles and do not have the resources to accommodate such a regulation. Similarly, Amendment 134 alters the weight limit down to 2.8 tonnes. Whilst companies in Germany operate under such limits, the UK does not. It broadens the scope of the legislation enormously, again without adequate justification. Many representatives of the UK freight and haulage industry strongly oppose plans to prevent operators carrying out their own tachograph calibration. It is right that this amendment be lifted, and I hope that it stays out of future proposals. Today’s proposals establish far-reaching surveillance that goes beyond anything anticipated or justified. I fear that permitting these amendments could pave the way for Brussels to roll out similar levels of monitoring and enforcement for other road users and in other industries."@el10
"Mr President, a number of amendments have raised serious concerns inside the British freight industry. Amendment 136 seeks to broaden the reach of the legislation by altering the weight threshold for vehicles subject to regulation, in some cases bringing it down to one-and-a-half tonnes. This brings millions of vans into the remit without any recourse to an impact assessment. It would bankrupt small businesses up and down the UK which are reliant upon such vehicles and do not have the resources to accommodate such a regulation. Similarly, Amendment 134 alters the weight limit down to 2.8 tonnes. Whilst companies in Germany operate under such limits, the UK does not. It broadens the scope of the legislation enormously, again without adequate justification. Many representatives of the UK freight and haulage industry strongly oppose plans to prevent operators carrying out their own tachograph calibration. It is right that this amendment be lifted, and I hope that it stays out of future proposals. Today’s proposals establish far-reaching surveillance that goes beyond anything anticipated or justified. I fear that permitting these amendments could pave the way for Brussels to roll out similar levels of monitoring and enforcement for other road users and in other industries."@es21
"Mr President, a number of amendments have raised serious concerns inside the British freight industry. Amendment 136 seeks to broaden the reach of the legislation by altering the weight threshold for vehicles subject to regulation, in some cases bringing it down to one-and-a-half tonnes. This brings millions of vans into the remit without any recourse to an impact assessment. It would bankrupt small businesses up and down the UK which are reliant upon such vehicles and do not have the resources to accommodate such a regulation. Similarly, Amendment 134 alters the weight limit down to 2.8 tonnes. Whilst companies in Germany operate under such limits, the UK does not. It broadens the scope of the legislation enormously, again without adequate justification. Many representatives of the UK freight and haulage industry strongly oppose plans to prevent operators carrying out their own tachograph calibration. It is right that this amendment be lifted, and I hope that it stays out of future proposals. Today’s proposals establish far-reaching surveillance that goes beyond anything anticipated or justified. I fear that permitting these amendments could pave the way for Brussels to roll out similar levels of monitoring and enforcement for other road users and in other industries."@et5
"Mr President, a number of amendments have raised serious concerns inside the British freight industry. Amendment 136 seeks to broaden the reach of the legislation by altering the weight threshold for vehicles subject to regulation, in some cases bringing it down to one-and-a-half tonnes. This brings millions of vans into the remit without any recourse to an impact assessment. It would bankrupt small businesses up and down the UK which are reliant upon such vehicles and do not have the resources to accommodate such a regulation. Similarly, Amendment 134 alters the weight limit down to 2.8 tonnes. Whilst companies in Germany operate under such limits, the UK does not. It broadens the scope of the legislation enormously, again without adequate justification. Many representatives of the UK freight and haulage industry strongly oppose plans to prevent operators carrying out their own tachograph calibration. It is right that this amendment be lifted, and I hope that it stays out of future proposals. Today’s proposals establish far-reaching surveillance that goes beyond anything anticipated or justified. I fear that permitting these amendments could pave the way for Brussels to roll out similar levels of monitoring and enforcement for other road users and in other industries."@fi7
"Mr President, a number of amendments have raised serious concerns inside the British freight industry. Amendment 136 seeks to broaden the reach of the legislation by altering the weight threshold for vehicles subject to regulation, in some cases bringing it down to one-and-a-half tonnes. This brings millions of vans into the remit without any recourse to an impact assessment. It would bankrupt small businesses up and down the UK which are reliant upon such vehicles and do not have the resources to accommodate such a regulation. Similarly, Amendment 134 alters the weight limit down to 2.8 tonnes. Whilst companies in Germany operate under such limits, the UK does not. It broadens the scope of the legislation enormously, again without adequate justification. Many representatives of the UK freight and haulage industry strongly oppose plans to prevent operators carrying out their own tachograph calibration. It is right that this amendment be lifted, and I hope that it stays out of future proposals. Today’s proposals establish far-reaching surveillance that goes beyond anything anticipated or justified. I fear that permitting these amendments could pave the way for Brussels to roll out similar levels of monitoring and enforcement for other road users and in other industries."@fr8
"Mr President, a number of amendments have raised serious concerns inside the British freight industry. Amendment 136 seeks to broaden the reach of the legislation by altering the weight threshold for vehicles subject to regulation, in some cases bringing it down to one-and-a-half tonnes. This brings millions of vans into the remit without any recourse to an impact assessment. It would bankrupt small businesses up and down the UK which are reliant upon such vehicles and do not have the resources to accommodate such a regulation. Similarly, Amendment 134 alters the weight limit down to 2.8 tonnes. Whilst companies in Germany operate under such limits, the UK does not. It broadens the scope of the legislation enormously, again without adequate justification. Many representatives of the UK freight and haulage industry strongly oppose plans to prevent operators carrying out their own tachograph calibration. It is right that this amendment be lifted, and I hope that it stays out of future proposals. Today’s proposals establish far-reaching surveillance that goes beyond anything anticipated or justified. I fear that permitting these amendments could pave the way for Brussels to roll out similar levels of monitoring and enforcement for other road users and in other industries."@hu11
"Mr President, a number of amendments have raised serious concerns inside the British freight industry. Amendment 136 seeks to broaden the reach of the legislation by altering the weight threshold for vehicles subject to regulation, in some cases bringing it down to one-and-a-half tonnes. This brings millions of vans into the remit without any recourse to an impact assessment. It would bankrupt small businesses up and down the UK which are reliant upon such vehicles and do not have the resources to accommodate such a regulation. Similarly, Amendment 134 alters the weight limit down to 2.8 tonnes. Whilst companies in Germany operate under such limits, the UK does not. It broadens the scope of the legislation enormously, again without adequate justification. Many representatives of the UK freight and haulage industry strongly oppose plans to prevent operators carrying out their own tachograph calibration. It is right that this amendment be lifted, and I hope that it stays out of future proposals. Today’s proposals establish far-reaching surveillance that goes beyond anything anticipated or justified. I fear that permitting these amendments could pave the way for Brussels to roll out similar levels of monitoring and enforcement for other road users and in other industries."@it12
"Mr President, a number of amendments have raised serious concerns inside the British freight industry. Amendment 136 seeks to broaden the reach of the legislation by altering the weight threshold for vehicles subject to regulation, in some cases bringing it down to one-and-a-half tonnes. This brings millions of vans into the remit without any recourse to an impact assessment. It would bankrupt small businesses up and down the UK which are reliant upon such vehicles and do not have the resources to accommodate such a regulation. Similarly, Amendment 134 alters the weight limit down to 2.8 tonnes. Whilst companies in Germany operate under such limits, the UK does not. It broadens the scope of the legislation enormously, again without adequate justification. Many representatives of the UK freight and haulage industry strongly oppose plans to prevent operators carrying out their own tachograph calibration. It is right that this amendment be lifted, and I hope that it stays out of future proposals. Today’s proposals establish far-reaching surveillance that goes beyond anything anticipated or justified. I fear that permitting these amendments could pave the way for Brussels to roll out similar levels of monitoring and enforcement for other road users and in other industries."@lt14
"Mr President, a number of amendments have raised serious concerns inside the British freight industry. Amendment 136 seeks to broaden the reach of the legislation by altering the weight threshold for vehicles subject to regulation, in some cases bringing it down to one-and-a-half tonnes. This brings millions of vans into the remit without any recourse to an impact assessment. It would bankrupt small businesses up and down the UK which are reliant upon such vehicles and do not have the resources to accommodate such a regulation. Similarly, Amendment 134 alters the weight limit down to 2.8 tonnes. Whilst companies in Germany operate under such limits, the UK does not. It broadens the scope of the legislation enormously, again without adequate justification. Many representatives of the UK freight and haulage industry strongly oppose plans to prevent operators carrying out their own tachograph calibration. It is right that this amendment be lifted, and I hope that it stays out of future proposals. Today’s proposals establish far-reaching surveillance that goes beyond anything anticipated or justified. I fear that permitting these amendments could pave the way for Brussels to roll out similar levels of monitoring and enforcement for other road users and in other industries."@lv13
"Mr President, a number of amendments have raised serious concerns inside the British freight industry. Amendment 136 seeks to broaden the reach of the legislation by altering the weight threshold for vehicles subject to regulation, in some cases bringing it down to one-and-a-half tonnes. This brings millions of vans into the remit without any recourse to an impact assessment. It would bankrupt small businesses up and down the UK which are reliant upon such vehicles and do not have the resources to accommodate such a regulation. Similarly, Amendment 134 alters the weight limit down to 2.8 tonnes. Whilst companies in Germany operate under such limits, the UK does not. It broadens the scope of the legislation enormously, again without adequate justification. Many representatives of the UK freight and haulage industry strongly oppose plans to prevent operators carrying out their own tachograph calibration. It is right that this amendment be lifted, and I hope that it stays out of future proposals. Today’s proposals establish far-reaching surveillance that goes beyond anything anticipated or justified. I fear that permitting these amendments could pave the way for Brussels to roll out similar levels of monitoring and enforcement for other road users and in other industries."@mt15
"Mr President, a number of amendments have raised serious concerns inside the British freight industry. Amendment 136 seeks to broaden the reach of the legislation by altering the weight threshold for vehicles subject to regulation, in some cases bringing it down to one-and-a-half tonnes. This brings millions of vans into the remit without any recourse to an impact assessment. It would bankrupt small businesses up and down the UK which are reliant upon such vehicles and do not have the resources to accommodate such a regulation. Similarly, Amendment 134 alters the weight limit down to 2.8 tonnes. Whilst companies in Germany operate under such limits, the UK does not. It broadens the scope of the legislation enormously, again without adequate justification. Many representatives of the UK freight and haulage industry strongly oppose plans to prevent operators carrying out their own tachograph calibration. It is right that this amendment be lifted, and I hope that it stays out of future proposals. Today’s proposals establish far-reaching surveillance that goes beyond anything anticipated or justified. I fear that permitting these amendments could pave the way for Brussels to roll out similar levels of monitoring and enforcement for other road users and in other industries."@nl3
"Mr President, a number of amendments have raised serious concerns inside the British freight industry. Amendment 136 seeks to broaden the reach of the legislation by altering the weight threshold for vehicles subject to regulation, in some cases bringing it down to one-and-a-half tonnes. This brings millions of vans into the remit without any recourse to an impact assessment. It would bankrupt small businesses up and down the UK which are reliant upon such vehicles and do not have the resources to accommodate such a regulation. Similarly, Amendment 134 alters the weight limit down to 2.8 tonnes. Whilst companies in Germany operate under such limits, the UK does not. It broadens the scope of the legislation enormously, again without adequate justification. Many representatives of the UK freight and haulage industry strongly oppose plans to prevent operators carrying out their own tachograph calibration. It is right that this amendment be lifted, and I hope that it stays out of future proposals. Today’s proposals establish far-reaching surveillance that goes beyond anything anticipated or justified. I fear that permitting these amendments could pave the way for Brussels to roll out similar levels of monitoring and enforcement for other road users and in other industries."@pl16
"Mr President, a number of amendments have raised serious concerns inside the British freight industry. Amendment 136 seeks to broaden the reach of the legislation by altering the weight threshold for vehicles subject to regulation, in some cases bringing it down to one-and-a-half tonnes. This brings millions of vans into the remit without any recourse to an impact assessment. It would bankrupt small businesses up and down the UK which are reliant upon such vehicles and do not have the resources to accommodate such a regulation. Similarly, Amendment 134 alters the weight limit down to 2.8 tonnes. Whilst companies in Germany operate under such limits, the UK does not. It broadens the scope of the legislation enormously, again without adequate justification. Many representatives of the UK freight and haulage industry strongly oppose plans to prevent operators carrying out their own tachograph calibration. It is right that this amendment be lifted, and I hope that it stays out of future proposals. Today’s proposals establish far-reaching surveillance that goes beyond anything anticipated or justified. I fear that permitting these amendments could pave the way for Brussels to roll out similar levels of monitoring and enforcement for other road users and in other industries."@pt17
"Mr President, a number of amendments have raised serious concerns inside the British freight industry. Amendment 136 seeks to broaden the reach of the legislation by altering the weight threshold for vehicles subject to regulation, in some cases bringing it down to one-and-a-half tonnes. This brings millions of vans into the remit without any recourse to an impact assessment. It would bankrupt small businesses up and down the UK which are reliant upon such vehicles and do not have the resources to accommodate such a regulation. Similarly, Amendment 134 alters the weight limit down to 2.8 tonnes. Whilst companies in Germany operate under such limits, the UK does not. It broadens the scope of the legislation enormously, again without adequate justification. Many representatives of the UK freight and haulage industry strongly oppose plans to prevent operators carrying out their own tachograph calibration. It is right that this amendment be lifted, and I hope that it stays out of future proposals. Today’s proposals establish far-reaching surveillance that goes beyond anything anticipated or justified. I fear that permitting these amendments could pave the way for Brussels to roll out similar levels of monitoring and enforcement for other road users and in other industries."@ro18
"Mr President, a number of amendments have raised serious concerns inside the British freight industry. Amendment 136 seeks to broaden the reach of the legislation by altering the weight threshold for vehicles subject to regulation, in some cases bringing it down to one-and-a-half tonnes. This brings millions of vans into the remit without any recourse to an impact assessment. It would bankrupt small businesses up and down the UK which are reliant upon such vehicles and do not have the resources to accommodate such a regulation. Similarly, Amendment 134 alters the weight limit down to 2.8 tonnes. Whilst companies in Germany operate under such limits, the UK does not. It broadens the scope of the legislation enormously, again without adequate justification. Many representatives of the UK freight and haulage industry strongly oppose plans to prevent operators carrying out their own tachograph calibration. It is right that this amendment be lifted, and I hope that it stays out of future proposals. Today’s proposals establish far-reaching surveillance that goes beyond anything anticipated or justified. I fear that permitting these amendments could pave the way for Brussels to roll out similar levels of monitoring and enforcement for other road users and in other industries."@sk19
"Mr President, a number of amendments have raised serious concerns inside the British freight industry. Amendment 136 seeks to broaden the reach of the legislation by altering the weight threshold for vehicles subject to regulation, in some cases bringing it down to one-and-a-half tonnes. This brings millions of vans into the remit without any recourse to an impact assessment. It would bankrupt small businesses up and down the UK which are reliant upon such vehicles and do not have the resources to accommodate such a regulation. Similarly, Amendment 134 alters the weight limit down to 2.8 tonnes. Whilst companies in Germany operate under such limits, the UK does not. It broadens the scope of the legislation enormously, again without adequate justification. Many representatives of the UK freight and haulage industry strongly oppose plans to prevent operators carrying out their own tachograph calibration. It is right that this amendment be lifted, and I hope that it stays out of future proposals. Today’s proposals establish far-reaching surveillance that goes beyond anything anticipated or justified. I fear that permitting these amendments could pave the way for Brussels to roll out similar levels of monitoring and enforcement for other road users and in other industries."@sl20
"Mr President, a number of amendments have raised serious concerns inside the British freight industry. Amendment 136 seeks to broaden the reach of the legislation by altering the weight threshold for vehicles subject to regulation, in some cases bringing it down to one-and-a-half tonnes. This brings millions of vans into the remit without any recourse to an impact assessment. It would bankrupt small businesses up and down the UK which are reliant upon such vehicles and do not have the resources to accommodate such a regulation. Similarly, Amendment 134 alters the weight limit down to 2.8 tonnes. Whilst companies in Germany operate under such limits, the UK does not. It broadens the scope of the legislation enormously, again without adequate justification. Many representatives of the UK freight and haulage industry strongly oppose plans to prevent operators carrying out their own tachograph calibration. It is right that this amendment be lifted, and I hope that it stays out of future proposals. Today’s proposals establish far-reaching surveillance that goes beyond anything anticipated or justified. I fear that permitting these amendments could pave the way for Brussels to roll out similar levels of monitoring and enforcement for other road users and in other industries."@sv22
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata
"John Bufton (EFD ). -"18,5,20,15,1,19,14,16,11,2,7,3,22,13,10,9,17,21,12,8
lpv:videoURI

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