Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-06-23-Speech-4-113"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2005-06-23"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Explanations of vote2
dcterms:Language	"de"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20050623.30.4-113"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2005-06-23-Speech-4-1142
lpv:speaker	lp:Michl Ebner2
lpv:spokenAs	member_of_the_bureau; EPP-ED (2004-11-14--2009-07-13)3 substitute; AFET (2004-09-15--2007-01-14)3 unknown; Südtiroler Volkspartei (2004-09-20--2009-07-13)3 member; AGRI (2004-07-21--2007-01-14)3 member; Delegation to the EU-Croatia Joint Parliamentary Committee (2004-09-15--2009-07-13)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, I have voted against this Statute, and have done so for five reasons. The first is that I think this is not the right time for it; while Europe as a whole is grappling with its future, we are concerning ourselves with the future of our financial arrangements. The second is that I am opposed to tax privileges. The third is that I see our having our pensions paid by the taxpayer as sending the wrong message. The fourth is that I do not think we should be getting a percentage of what judges are paid; rather, things should be the other way around, with judges being paid a percentage of what the freely-elected representatives of a sovereign people earn. After all, it would also sound much better if judges were to be paid 250% of an MEP’s salary. Finally, all this involves us looking into the future; we are taking decisions on behalf of future Members, and I do not find that exactly proper either. As I do not regard this as a particularly favourable result, I have voted ‘no’. I am sure that many of my colleagues who have voted ‘yes’ today have done so not out of conviction, but in response to pressure from the media, and that, too, is a pity."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph