Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2012-04-18-Speech-3-501-000"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2012-04-18"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Taxation of energy products and electricity (debate)2
dcterms:Language	"de"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20120418.25.3-501-000"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2012-04-18-Speech-3-502-0002
lpv:speaker	lp:Markus Ferber2
lpv:spokenAs	vice-chair; Delegation to the EU-Mexico Joint Parliamentary Committee (2009-09-16--2014-06-30)3 member; ECON (2012-01-19--2014-06-30)3 substitute; TRAN (2012-01-19--2014-06-30)3 substitute; Delegation for relations with Israel (2009-09-16--2014-06-30)3 member; Delegation to the Euro-Latin American Parliamentary Assembly (2009-09-16--2014-06-30)3 unknown; Christlich-Soziale Union in Bayern e.V. (2009-07-14--2014-06-30)3 member_of_the_bureau; EPP (2009-07-14--2014-06-30)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, we should stop acting as if we can save the world every time we get together in Strasbourg. Once again, we have a proposal on the table, and once again we are saving the world, the climate, our resources and who knows what else – even though we have already done it before elsewhere. It makes no sense to do the same thing over and over again. That is why I want to state very clearly that it makes no sense – as the Commissioner has said – to burden aviation, where we have a functioning emissions certificate trading system that we hope will also soon be effective internationally, with an additional tax. It makes no sense to include shipping, which has ideal alternative options, in this tax. It makes no sense to engineer a compromise between energy density and CO emissions. Excuse me for saying so, but as an engineer, I must point out that high energy density means lower CO emissions per kilometre travelled. Penalising this correlation twice is equally non-sensical. I therefore have to say that the Commission proposal has not been fully thought out. What the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs approved by a majority – against the wishes of the Group of the European People’s Party (Christian Democrats) – only makes a half-baked proposal worse still. There is not the slightest chance that unanimity will be achieved in the Council of Ministers. That is why we need to be honest here in the European Parliament and say that we reject the report. We need to throw out this proposal. It is half-baked, unusable, and there are better ways of saving the world than through tax legislation."@en1
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata	"2"1
lpv:videoURI	<go to Events_and_structure europarl>2

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph