Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2012-07-03-Speech-2-703-000"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2012-07-03"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Common rules for direct support schemes for farmers - Support for rural development by the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development - Common organisation of agricultural markets and specific provisions for certain agricultural products - Financing of the common agricultural policy - Organic production and labelling of organic products - System of financing by the European Agricultural Guarantee Fund (debate)2
dcterms:Language	"de"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20120703.26.2-703-000"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2012-07-03-Speech-2-704-0002
lpv:speaker	lp:Martin Häusling2
lpv:spokenAs	unknown; Bündnis 90/Die Grünen (2009-07-14--2014-06-30)3 member; Delegation to the EU-Chile Joint Parliamentary Committee (2009-09-16--2014-06-30)3 member; Delegation to the Euro-Latin American Parliamentary Assembly (2009-09-16--2014-06-30)3 substitute; Delegation for relations with Canada (2009-09-16--2014-06-30)3 member; G/EFA (2009-07-14--2014-06-30)3 member; CONT (2012-01-19--2014-06-30)3 member; AGRI (2012-01-19--2014-06-30)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, Mr Cioloş, I would like to thank you once again for explaining to us that you are prepared to compromise. I want to make it clear yet again that this is not a case of Parliament harping on about principles. It is about clear regulations for the future which everyone will have to live with, including the Commission, the Council and Parliament. It is no use reaching compromises that do not last longer than a day. We must make sure that the legal framework for years to come is clearly defined. What is sometimes lacking is trust in the institutions and, perhaps, trust in Parliament on the part of the Council. It was repeatedly said in the negotiations, and you have just said the same thing indirectly, that it could delay the individual legislative procedures. It may be the case that there are occasional delays. However, on the other hand, Parliament’s expertise should not be excluded. For example, we have proposed incorporating the substances into the basic acts in the knowledge that there have only been two amendments in four years, which could have been rubber-stamped by Parliament using a rapid procedure. The concern that Parliament is likely to delay or block the process is unjustified. We must send out a clear signal in first reading that we insist on our rights. This signal must also go out to the Council. We must make it clear that we are not open to persuasion, we will not reach uneasy compromises, and we cannot ultimately allow the lawyers to decide by themselves what we will do. There must be a fair political dialogue involving all the institutions. I would like to thank you specifically for once again offering us a compromise. We will be happy to look into it again. If we can move close enough together on this issue that only a small step is needed, I believe that we will be able to amend this regulation so that everyone agrees with it. For us, it is also about rapidly introducing procedures at this point which accommodate everyone and ensuring that no one can claim that Parliament is blocking progress. We do not want that under any circumstances. However, we must look after our own interests in this context and we will not make a deal that ultimately does not suit us. I would like to make it clear once again that until now, all the compromises have been made by Parliament while the Council has seldom proposed a single one."@en1
lpv:videoURI	<go to Events_and_structure europarl>2

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph