Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2004-03-30-Speech-2-052"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2004-03-30"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Protection of animals2
dcterms:Language	"de"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20040330.3.2-052"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2004-03-30-Speech-2-0532
lpv:speaker	lp:Daniela Raschhofer2
lpv:spokenAs	substitute; Committee on Women's Rights and Equal Opportunities (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3 member; Delegation to the EU-Hungary Joint Parliamentary Committee (2002-02-06--2004-04-30)3 member; NA (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 unknown; Freiheitliche Partei Österreichs (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 member; Committee on Industry, External Trade, Research and Energy (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, 95% of live animal transports are by road and we are all familiar with the images of tormented animals confined in a very narrow space for days on end as they are transported across Europe and beyond. There can be no doubt that something needs to be done. I support the proposals made in this report that will help to improve standards in live animal transports, such as setting minimum standards for the vehicles used, but above all the introduction of additional supervisory measures, because however good the rules may be, they will not work if there are no controls. There are already plenty of rules, but enforcement and controls are lacking. Amendment No 2, of which I am a co-signatory, is designed to clarify the term ‘journey’ in order to prevent the maximum duration of transport being exceeded by the back door, so to speak. Transport times must be reduced in any case. The vote has been brought forward to today. Amendment No 81 states, and I quote: ‘sequences of travel times may be repeated during a journey’, which means there can be repeated journeys and the time limits can be avoided. As a block vote has been applied for, it is no longer possible to vote against Amendment No 81 on its own. I consider that unacceptable. The best thing would be for animals to be transported as little as possible. That is probably pie in the sky. We must be clear that sales-based support for live animal exports is an incentive and that we are therefore deceiving ourselves if we want to cut animal transports to a minimum so long as such support continues."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph