Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2011-02-15-Speech-2-394-000"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2011-02-15"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Explanations of vote2
dcterms:Language	"pt"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20110215.22.2-394-000"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2011-02-15-Speech-2-395-0002
lpv:speaker	lp:Ilda Figueiredo2
lpv:spokenAs	vice-chair; Delegation for relations with the countries of Central America (2009-09-16--2012-01-17)3 unknown; Coligação Democrática Unitária (PCP-PEV) (2009-07-14--2012-01-17)3 vice-chair; EUL/NGL (2009-07-14--2012-01-17)3 vice-chair; EMPL (2009-07-16--2012-01-17)3 member; FEMM (2009-07-16--2012-01-17)3 substitute; ITRE (2009-07-16--2012-01-17)3 substitute; Special committee on the policy challenges and budgetary resources for a sustainable European Union after 2013 (2010-06-17--2011-06-30)3 member; Delegation to the Euro-Latin American Parliamentary Assembly (2009-09-16--2012-01-17)3 substitute; Delegation for relations with the Mercosur countries (2009-09-16--2012-01-17)3
lpv:translated text	"This proposal essentially consists of a codification of the unchanged provisions of three regulations adopted between 1987 and 1990, which establish the permitted levels of radioactive contamination in the event of a radiological emergency. However, the insertion of a new recital which explains the need for an existing article, reserving for the Council the use of implementing powers, implies a substantive change which justifies the use of the recasting technique. The content of the regulation consists of a mechanism of two levels of intervention in the event of a radiological emergency or nuclear accident, as proposed by the Commission: the immediate adoption by the Commission of an regulation to apply the maximum permitted levels of radioactive contamination specified in Annexes I and III of the proposal to a specific case, in a definite area and for a limited period; establishment of a period of one month following its adoption for the Commission to forward a proposal to the Council to adapt or confirm this regulation. As shown in the debate in the specialist committee itself and in the alternative proposals which it presents, there is a power struggle going on here between the Commission and the Council. However, the primary aim should be to serve the citizens’ interests by means of better management of post-accident situations, with respect for the competences of the Member States affected. Therefore, our final vote was one of abstention."@en1
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata	"ad hoc"1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph