Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-09-25-Speech-4-033"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2003-09-25"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Lloyd's Petitions2
dcterms:Language	"it"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20030925.4.4-033"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2003-09-25-Speech-4-0342
lpv:speaker	lp:Vitaliano Gemelli2
lpv:spokenAs	member; Committee on Development and Cooperation (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)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) (2002-02-06--2004-07-19)3 chair; PETI (2002-01-23--2004-07-19)3 member_of_the_bureau; EPP-ED (2002-03-08--2004-07-19)3 member; Conference of Committee Chairs (2002-01-23--2004-07-19)3 substitute; Committee on Foreign Affairs, Human Rights, Common Security and Defence Policy (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3 unknown; Unione democratico cristiana (2003-02-01--2004-07-19)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, I, too, should like to thank Mr Bolkestein, for whom I have no questions. I would merely like to retrace our steps in this debate for a moment to, when talking about petitions and the gargantuan ventures brought about by globalisation, I made an analogy: the citizen and the giant. There is an enormous discrepancy between the citizen and the giant. Parliament should now ask itself what it can to do protect citizen’s rights. This is a situation – as Mr Perry has made very clear by mentioning a case in point – which affects many citizens who have gone bankrupt. There are a large number of trials under way in the United States and some in Europe too with many in the United Kingdom. How can we not wonder what the solution to this situation is and how it will develop? How can we not ask Parliament, how can we not even ask ourselves what we should do to resolve this situation? Lloyd’s of London is a large institution, which still enjoys worldwide credibility, but clearly, at some point, something happened, there was some error, because, otherwise, there would not have been this proliferation of cases reported by the citizens. There are now those who are calling for a committee of inquiry to be set up and those who oppose this, but it is not a problem that must be resolved in court, not least because we do not want to start legal proceedings, because we are not qualified to start proceedings and because we do not want there to be adverse parties. All we want to do is respond to the requests of the citizens, because this is our mandate: a mandate of representation that we must fulfil completely by representing both the citizens and institutions such as Lloyd’s of London. I therefore do not intend to criminalise anybody. Instead, I want to understand why this situation exists. If the Commission’s reply, when it arrives, is not comprehensive, then only an inquiry which we can carry out without any pressure will reveal the crux of the matter, the gap, the loophole through which this great mistake, which has caused so much harm, managed to slip."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph