Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-09-25-Speech-1-116"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2006-09-25"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:2004 discharge: Section I - European Parliament (debate)2
dcterms:Language	"nl"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20060925.15.1-116"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2006-09-25-Speech-1-1172
lpv:speaker	lp:Bart Staes2
lpv:spokenAs	substitute; Delegation to the EU-Kazakhstan, EU-Kyrgyzstan and EU-Uzbekistan Parliamentary Cooperation Committees, and for relations with Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Mongolia (2004-09-15--2009-07-13)3 unknown; Groen (2004-07-20--2009-07-13)3 member; CONT (2004-07-21--2007-01-14)3 member; G/EFA (2004-07-20--2009-07-13)3 substitute; ENVI (2004-07-21--2007-01-14)3 member; Delegation to the EU-Russia Parliamentary Cooperation Committee (2004-09-15--2009-07-13)3
lpv:translated text	". Mr President, I should like to single out two sections of Mr Ferber’s excellent report: the buildings policy and the voluntary pension fund. Turning to the buildings policy first, about which all speakers have had something to say, we now have before us a second report as a result of that article in the press. A special working party was set up, in which, I believe, we all worked very hard and very well together, and in which we tried to give Mr Ferber maximum support. The conclusions are therefore identical across the board, and most Members have quoted them. We have been unable to identify any unlawful actions or corruption, but what we do know is that, over the past 20 years, the European Parliament has paid the City of Strasbourg quite a bit over the odds in rent, at least EUR 32 million and probably more, between EUR 42 and EUR 60 million. What is also unacceptable in my view is that the City of Strasbourg took the unilateral decision at one point to set aside EUR 11 million over that period for what it referred to as covering the risk of Parliament ever leaving its seat in this City. These actions have dealt the relationship between the City of Strasbourg and the European Parliament a heavy blow, and it comes as no surprise, then, that this has cranked up the entire debate on Parliament’s seat. Whilst I am aware that this is not what this discharge report is about, I do think that Parliament should, in a recommendation to the Council, finally make up its mind and say whether it wants to continue to have its seat in this city or not. Finally, I should like to mention the voluntary pension fund, which is another important aspect of Mr Ferber’s report. At the end of 2004, that fund suffered an insurance deficit to the tune of EUR 43 million, which, fortunately, dropped to EUR 28 million by the end of 2005. I should like to draw attention to my Amendment 5, which expressly states that Parliament itself can never be held liable for that deficit. It is a voluntary pension fund, one that is managed by the managers. As such, it is they who should be saddled with any deficits, not Parliament or the taxpayer. It is the managers who are responsible for the unethical, or incorrect, management of vast amounts of money."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph