Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-04-26-Speech-3-178"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2006-04-26"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Discharges for the implementation of the European Union general budget for the financial year 2004 (debate)2
dcterms:Language	"fi"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20060426.15.3-178"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2006-04-26-Speech-3-1792
lpv:speaker	lp:Esko Seppänen2
lpv:spokenAs	vice-chair; Delegation to the EU-Russia Parliamentary Cooperation Committee (2004-09-21--2009-07-13)3,3 unknown; Vasemmistoliitto (2004-07-20--2009-07-13)3,3 substitute; Delegation to the EU-Kazakhstan, EU-Kyrgyzstan and EU-Uzbekistan Parliamentary Cooperation Committees, and for relations with Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Mongolia (2004-09-15--2009-07-13)3,3 member_of_the_bureau; EUL/NGL (2004-07-20--2009-07-13)3,3 substitute; CONT (2004-07-21--2007-01-14)3,3 substitute; ITRE (2004-07-21--2007-01-14)3,3 member; BUDG (2004-07-21--2007-01-14)3,3
lpv:translated text	". Mr President, Commissioner, I wish to continue the discussion regarding Parliament’s discharge. Parliament’s budget for 2004 was EUR 1 231 million. If Parliament had just one language and just one place of business, 60% of this expenditure would be saved. Holding Parliament’s plenary part-sessions in Strasbourg costs more than EUR 200 million. Of that, some EUR 10 million is spent on rent for the Salvador de Madariaga and Winston Churchill buildings. Parliament receives 20% of all EU administrative expenditure for its own use. That is such a lot of money that not all of it can be easily spent. At the end of last year, there was an EUR 85 million surplus of cash remaining in Parliament’s budget, a surplus for which a use had to be quickly thought up. The Bureau finally proposed the purchase of the Madariaga and Churchill buildings. These were owned by SCI-Erasme, a Dutch pension fund, or its subsidiary. Parliament, however, paid rent to the city of Strasbourg. During the purchase negotiations, it emerged that for a quarter of a century the city had been charging Parliament more than it paid to Erasme. The city of Strasbourg was therefore cashing in on the fact that Parliament had its premises in the city. The city has refused to say how much extra money was generated in this way. This situation is intolerable. Our group supports a full and thorough investigation into this. With that purpose in mind, we are prepared to reject Mr Ferber’s report and refer it back to the Committee for further deliberation. Because of the new areas of confusion that have emerged, we ought to do the same with regard to the report on discharge for the Committee of the Regions drafted by Mr Lundgren."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph