Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-09-29-Speech-4-102"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20050929.14.4-102"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
I voted in favour of this text.
What kind of price increase are we talking about?
For want of suitable Community powers, I first address the Member States:
In the price of oil, we pay between 60% and 80% tax to the Member States. For example, in France, each time I pay EUR 1 to a petrol pump attendant, that amounts to paying 80 cents to the taxman … With proportions such as these, oil consumption is turning into an outright revenue pump.
If this national tax windfall helped to fund Research and Innovation to make us less dependent on oil, then I would see the positive aspects of it, but I am afraid that it does nothing of the sort.
I would also like to address the Commission:
The Commission should enhance its programme to support the development of biofuels and thus revise certain strategic pillars of the CAP.
In the context of the revision of the Lisbon Strategy, developing industrial innovations in the environmental sector and becoming self-sufficient in terms of energy sources are among the keys to successfully reviving the growth Europe requires. In particular, I am thinking of the car industry and the example of hydrogen-powered fuel cells. The Commission could also take a strong initiative to support solar energy and the means to permanently eliminate all kinds of energy waste …"@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
"(The explanation of vote abbreviated in accordance with Rule 163 of the Rules of Procedure)"1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples