Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2007-07-11-Speech-3-196"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2007-07-11"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Explanations of vote2
dcterms:Language	"fr"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20070711.22.3-196"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2007-07-11-Speech-3-1972
lpv:speaker	lp:Robert Goebbels2
lpv:spokenAs	unknown; Parti ouvrier socialiste luxembourgeois (2004-07-20--2009-07-13)3 substitute; ITRE (2007-01-31--2009-07-13)3 substitute; Delegation for relations with the countries of Southeast Asia and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) (2007-03-14--2009-07-13)3 member; ECON (2007-01-31--2009-07-13)3 substitute; Delegation to the ACP-EU Joint Parliamentary Assembly (2004-09-15--2009-07-13)3 substitute; CONT (2007-01-31--2009-07-13)3 substitute; Delegation for relations with India (2007-03-16--2009-07-13)3 member; Delegation for relations with the countries of South Asia (2007-03-15--2009-07-13)3 vice-chair; PES (2004-07-20--2009-07-13)3 member; Temporary Committee on Climate Change (2007-05-10--2009-02-04)3
lpv:translated text	". The abolition of the final postal monopoly was by no means necessary to safeguard an internal market benefiting consumers. The Commission drew up such proposals on purely ideological grounds, urged on by countries such as the United Kingdom, the Netherlands and the Scandinavian countries, that is, by the champions of the unbridled free market. It is no coincidence that these same countries are opposed to a more political integration of Europe. Even in the United States, the US Postal Service, for obvious reasons of protecting jobs, maintains final distribution in the public system. Although the European Parliament has given a bit of breathing space to some countries, including mine, this liberalisation will not benefit the common citizen."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph