Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-06-14-Speech-3-130"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2006-06-14"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Explanations of vote2
dcterms:Language	"da"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20060614.13.3-130"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2006-06-14-Speech-3-1312
lpv:speaker	lp:Jens-Peter Bonde2
lpv:spokenAs	substitute; CONT (2004-07-21--2007-01-14)3 member; AFCO (2004-07-21--2007-01-14)3 member; Conference of Presidents (2004-07-20--2006-12-12)3 chair; IND/DEM (2004-12-06--2008-05-08)3 unknown; JuniBevægelsen - Mod Unionen (2004-07-20--2008-05-08)3 vice-chair; Delegation for relations with Switzerland, Iceland and Norway and to the European Economic Area (EEA) Joint Parliamentary Committee (2004-09-21--2008-05-08)3
lpv:translated text	") One of the most important new elements in the Constitution is the proposal that all EU laws be able to have common penalties attached to them. They should be defending law and order but are themselves breaking the law. The Court of Justice could be put in its place by the parliaments of the Member States each deciding that this judgment is of no legal effect in their countries. We should also have a democratic procedure for appointing judges. It is perfectly logical for each Member State to determine, in the case of each law, what the price of breaking that law is to be. That is something that the Council of Ministers has also done. By means of an intergovernmental decision, it has unanimously determined the price to be paid for environmental crimes. The conflict is not about the content but about the form. The supranational European Court of Justice is not satisfied with being a court. The judges also want to be legislators, and in this case constitutional legislators into the bargain. What is more, they wish to legislate contrary to the unanimous decision of the Member States. They are simply adopting a section of the Constitution that has been expressly rejected. It is about as legal as the Beagle Boys deciding to empty Scrooge McDuck’s money bin. What are the judges thinking of?"@en1
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata	"(DA"1 "Jens-Peter Bonde (IND/DEM ),"1 "in writing."1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph