Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2008-04-10-Speech-4-241"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2008-04-10"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Explanations of vote2
dcterms:Language	"sv"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20080410.30.4-241"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2008-04-10-Speech-4-2422
lpv:speaker	lp:Olle Schmidt2
lpv:spokenAs	substitute; IMCO (2007-01-31--2009-07-13)3 member; ECON (2007-01-31--2009-07-13)3 member_of_the_bureau; ALDE (2006-10-19--2009-07-13)3 unknown; Folkpartiet liberalerna (2006-10-19--2009-07-13)3 member; Delegation to the ACP-EU Joint Parliamentary Assembly (2007-03-15--2009-07-13)3
lpv:translated text	". The culture reports produced by Parliament are often difficult to deal with. The intention is of course good and, as the report in question points out, it is a good idea, when it can be justified, to make use of the pan-European level in order to support artists in the pursuit of their profession. That does not mean that everything should be done at EU level. On the contrary, there is good reason here to keep a close eye on the subsidiarity principle, so that Member States do not lose the option of developing their own cultural policies. It was therefore in part a question of principle which led to my decision to vote against the report. Even more serious in this precise instance, however, is the language used in much of the report. Recital K has a tone which is frightening. The same insinuation slips into several other parts of the text. It is important to proceed with care and discretion when discussing concepts such as cultural heritage. No such care was taken here."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph