Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/1999-10-28-Speech-4-086"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"1999-10-28"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Votes2
dcterms:Language	"it"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.19991028.2.4-086"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:1999-10-28-Speech-4-0872
lpv:speaker	lp:Renzo Imbeni2
lpv:spokenAs	vice-president; European Parliament (1999-07-20--2002-01-14)3 member; PES (1999-07-20--2000-03-07)3 vice-president; Parliament's Bureau (1999-07-20--2002-01-14)3 member; Members from the European Parliament to the Joint Parliamentary Assembly of the Agreement between the African, Caribbean and Pacific States and the European Union (ACP-EU) (1999-09-14--2002-01-14)3 member; Committee on Development and Cooperation (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 substitute; Committee on Foreign Affairs, Human Rights, Common Security and Defence Policy (1999-07-22--2000-10-10)3 member; Delegation to the EU-Russia Parliamentary Cooperation Committee (1999-10-06--2002-01-14)3 unknown; Democratici di Sinistra (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3
lpv:translated text	"All the Members who were present in the House at the start have already heard the debate and several Members have already intervened. Clearly, we need to avoid a repeat of the debate which we had this morning, both as regards the agreement existing between the Groups on whether we should mention the firm we discussed at such length this morning and also as regards the specific question of whether the signatories of a specific compromise text were aware of the fact that a part of the text had been changed. I would like to make two proposals. Firstly, I think that the Secretary-General of Parliament should carry out a swift investigation into what actually happened. I think it is right for all of us to be informed for the sake of clarification. Some Members say they signed one text, but other Members say they signed a different one. I think that it is right for us to be informed as to what really happened. The Secretary-General of Parliament will inform us as soon as possible. As far as the point under discussion is concerned, I have the following proposal to make. If there are no objections, I can also put to the vote the part of an agreed text with regard to which there is a difference of opinion over whether or not it exists in the compromise text. However, I will only put this part to the vote if you all agree because, given that there are two versions, I cannot say that there is agreement. It is, however, possible for everyone to agree that, despite this different interpretation, it is appropriate to vote separately on the part which is controversial. I repeat – I can only go ahead with this vote if everyone agrees. I will obviously not be able to put that part to the vote if any of you is against this working hypothesis. To avoid restarting the debate, I would ask the Members who do not agree with the proposal which I have just made to say so immediately, so that we know whether, when we reach that part, we can vote on it or not. If there is an objection, I repeat, we will not be able to put it to the vote. Is there an objection to this proposal or do you all agree that that part of the amendment can be put to the vote anyway? There are no objections? Good. Well, when the time comes, we shall have a separate vote on each part."@en1
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata	"President. –"1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph