Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2012-07-02-Speech-1-030-000"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2012-07-02"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Order of business2
dcterms:Language	"de"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20120702.16.1-030-000"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2012-07-02-Speech-1-031-0002
lpv:speaker	lp:Manfred Weber2
lpv:spokenAs	substitute; DROI (2012-01-19--2014-06-30)3 vice-chair; EPP (2009-07-14--2014-06-30)3 substitute; LIBE (2012-01-19--2014-06-30)3 substitute; Delegation to the EU-Turkey Joint Parliamentary Committee (2012-05-07--2014-06-30)3 substitute; REGI (2012-01-19--2014-06-30)3 member; Delegation for relations with India (2009-09-16--2014-06-30)3 substitute; Delegation for relations with the countries of the Andean Community (2009-09-16--2013-03-20)3 unknown; Christlich-Soziale Union in Bayern e.V. (2009-07-14--2014-06-30)3 member; AFCO (2012-01-19--2014-06-30)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, we want to use the time tomorrow to discuss the current political situation in Romania, for three essential reasons. Firstly, we have all read in the newspapers that the matter at issue is a dispute about whether the Prime Minister is responsible for his doctoral thesis. His doctoral thesis is not our affair, however. Our subject instead is what is being done to the ethics commission in Romania responsible for resolving such incidents, which is a source of indignation for us – how people are being appointed how the ethics commission is being padded out, in order to possibly reach different results, and also how these results are being published in the official gazette, amended between Parliament and the government, in order to be able to react as quickly as possible and to be able to water down disagreeable judgments. The second thing that bothers us is the issue of what happened to the public television service in Romania. The legal basis for public service television in Romania states that the parliamentary groups are to be represented proportionately in the monitoring committees, while the people who have now been appointed all belong to the government’s political group, which is thus a violation of the law. The third request that we have, the third consideration that bothers us, is probably the most weighty, the most difficult, which is Romania’s representation at the European Council at the end of the week. I say this as there has been a dispute between the President and the Prime Minister as to who will represent Romania at the summit. This question was put to the Romanian constitutional court, which unambiguously decided that the President is responsible for representing the country abroad. The Prime Minister, meanwhile, has rejected this decision by the constitutional court and mobilised his parliamentary group to fight back. All of these are points where we ask the question of whether a prime minister is in a position to adhere to the democratic ground rules, the ground rules according to the constitution, or whether he wants to lead his country into a constitutional crisis. We therefore ask to debate this. Those Members who were heckling should bear in mind that we, as Parliament, need to take a critical view of developments – seriously, Mr Swoboda – and not view them through our party political spectacles. We should at least have the opportunity to discuss this – no more and no less! Anyone with nothing to hide need not be afraid of a debate."@en1
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata	"(Heckling)"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