Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-06-23-Speech-4-127"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20050623.30.4-127"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
On 17 December 2003, our party, the Dutch Socialist Party, voted against the then draft for a Members’ Statute. We were not opposed to a unified salary, but what was suggested at the time was far too high. Moreover, we considered it important that it should be possible to make this salary liable to national taxes and that the reimbursement of travel expenses should be restricted to those actually incurred. In our experience, on an annual basis, more than half can be recouped that way. In the Dutch parliament, we asked the government to reject this document in the Council.
The proposal that was amended as a result, on which we are voting today, is still not entirely what we want. Salaries must be below EUR 7 000 and we simply reject Article 9.3. We realise that voting ‘no’ at this stage will not yield any further improvements. Now that the maximum has been obtained, we consider this to be a victory in our long-term battle against inappropriate proposals. Acceptance of this proposal represents a defeat for those who for years resisted this Statute, thinking it beneath their dignity, the salaries and reimbursements of travel expenses too low, and the financial monitoring too intrusive. By voting against it, they will make it quite clear that they want, shamelessly, to line their own pockets."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples