Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-04-04-Speech-2-243"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20060404.23.2-243"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
".
In this particular directive the point about risk sensitivity is well made. There are different categories of risk and the authorities should draw up their procedures on the basis of those risk assessments. That is clearly specified in the third directive, and the point is well taken by the MEP.
I would not like to see a whole industry developing around people charging exorbitant fees for what should be a relatively reasonable procedure. The levels of risk should be assessed. There is very little to be done for those at a low level of risk, and there are higher categories. That is clearly set out in the directive. I thank the honourable Member for raising this question, because it gives me an opportunity to emphasise the point that she made in her supplementary question."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples