Matches in Saeima for { ?s ?p ?o. }
- 2016_02_04_342-seq282 speaker Inara_Murniece-1970.
- 2016_02_04_342-seq282 translatedText "But a debate on this proposal is a likely wave of MEP Kirga Kirga".
- 2016_02_04_342-seq282 mentions Q661684.
- 2016_02_04_342-seq282 mentions Q13460949.
- 2016_02_04_342-seq281 type Speech.
- 2016_02_04_342-seq281 number "281".
- 2016_02_04_342-seq281 date "2016-02-04".
- 2016_02_04_342-seq281 isPartOf 2016_02_04_342.
- 2016_02_04_342-seq281 spokenAs 92.
- 2016_02_04_342-seq281 spokenText "2. - deputāta Ķirša priekšlikums. Nav atbalstīts, bet tas arī nav balsojams.".
- 2016_02_04_342-seq281 language "lv".
- 2016_02_04_342-seq281 speaker Sergejs_Dolgopolovs-1941.
- 2016_02_04_342-seq281 translatedText "2 - MEP's proposal is not supported but it does not vote".
- 2016_02_04_342-seq280 type Speech.
- 2016_02_04_342-seq280 number "280".
- 2016_02_04_342-seq280 date "2016-02-04".
- 2016_02_04_342-seq280 isPartOf 2016_02_04_342.
- 2016_02_04_342-seq280 spokenAs 118.
- 2016_02_04_342-seq280 spokenText "Darba kārtībā ir 2.priekšlikums.".
- 2016_02_04_342-seq280 language "lv".
- 2016_02_04_342-seq280 speaker Inara_Murniece-1970.
- 2016_02_04_342-seq280 translatedText "2 proposal for a regulation".
- 2016_02_04_342-seq279 type Speech.
- 2016_02_04_342-seq279 number "279".
- 2016_02_04_342-seq279 date "2016-02-04".
- 2016_02_04_342-seq279 isPartOf 2016_02_04_342.
- 2016_02_04_342-seq279 spokenAs 92.
- 2016_02_04_342-seq279 spokenText "Es varu turpināt?".
- 2016_02_04_342-seq279 language "lv".
- 2016_02_04_342-seq279 speaker Sergejs_Dolgopolovs-1941.
- 2016_02_04_342-seq279 translatedText "Can I keep going?".
- 2016_02_04_342-seq278 type Speech.
- 2016_02_04_342-seq278 number "278".
- 2016_02_04_342-seq278 date "2016-02-04".
- 2016_02_04_342-seq278 isPartOf 2016_02_04_342.
- 2016_02_04_342-seq278 spokenAs 118.
- 2016_02_04_342-seq278 spokenText "Paldies. Lūdzu zvanu! Balsosim par 1. - tieslietu ministra Rasnača iesniegto priekšlikumu! Lūdzu balsošanas režīmu! Lūdzu rezultātu! Par - 55, pret - 19, atturas - 2. Priekšlikums ir atbalstīts. (Dep. K.Šadurskis: “Kā tas var būt?”)".
- 2016_02_04_342-seq278 language "lv".
- 2016_02_04_342-seq278 speaker Inara_Murniece-1970.
- 2016_02_04_342-seq278 translatedText "I would like to thank Please that the vote on the proposal tabled by Mrs Rasnac, the Minister for Justice, please vote! For the results!: 55, against - 19 abstentions - 2 have the support of the (DEP K politician:'). ").".
- 2016_02_04_342-seq278 mentions Q11213537.
- 2016_02_04_342-seq277 type Speech.
- 2016_02_04_342-seq277 number "277".
- 2016_02_04_342-seq277 date "2016-02-04".
- 2016_02_04_342-seq277 isPartOf 2016_02_04_342.
- 2016_02_04_342-seq277 spokenAs 92.
- 2016_02_04_342-seq277 spokenText "Kā es jau teicu, komisija ir izskatījusi šo priekšlikumu un to ir atbalstījusi.".
- 2016_02_04_342-seq277 language "lv".
- 2016_02_04_342-seq277 speaker Sergejs_Dolgopolovs-1941.
- 2016_02_04_342-seq277 translatedText "As I have already said, the Commission has looked into the proposal and has supported it".
- 2016_02_04_342-seq276 type Speech.
- 2016_02_04_342-seq276 number "276".
- 2016_02_04_342-seq276 date "2016-02-04".
- 2016_02_04_342-seq276 isPartOf 2016_02_04_342.
- 2016_02_04_342-seq276 spokenAs 118.
- 2016_02_04_342-seq276 spokenText "Paldies. Debates slēdzu. Komisija priekšlikumu ir atbalstījusi. Vai ziņotājs vēlas skaidrot komisijas pozīciju?".
- 2016_02_04_342-seq276 language "lv".
- 2016_02_04_342-seq276 speaker Inara_Murniece-1970.
- 2016_02_04_342-seq276 translatedText "Thanks for the debate the Commission proposal has been supported by the Commission as to whether the rapporteur wishes to explain the position of the commission?".
- 2016_02_04_342-seq275 type Speech.
- 2016_02_04_342-seq275 number "275".
- 2016_02_04_342-seq275 date "2016-02-04".
- 2016_02_04_342-seq275 isPartOf 2016_02_04_342.
- 2016_02_04_342-seq275 spokenAs 92.
- 2016_02_04_342-seq275 spokenText "Cienījamie kolēģi! Būtībā dažos vārdos par to, ko ir pateikusi Lībiņas-Egneres kundze. Nu kāds priekšlikums, kāds pārkāpums rezultātā ir? Tāds pārkāpums, ko ir pieļāvusi Saeima, vai tāds? Nu, tāds vai tāds? Pārkāpums ir. Satversmes tiesa to ir atzinusi, tāpēc šodien ir tas likumprojekts, ar kuru ir jāstrādā. Jo, ja nebūtu... ja būtu viss kartībā, tad likumprojekta nemaz nebūtu. Pareizi? Tik tiešām tā ir. Ja mēs neatbalstīsim minēto normu, vadoties pēc Lībiņas-Egneres kundzes piemērotās debašu tehnikas, mēs varētu pateikt, ka mēs arī tad izpildīsim Satversmes tiesas spriedumu. Atbalstīsim šo normu vai neatbalstīsim šo priekšlikumu - jebkurā gadījumā Satversmes tiesas spriedums tiks izpildīts. Jautājums tikai par tiem termiņiem starp tiem laika posmiem, ko piedāvā kārtējo reizi viens vai otrs spārns šajā Saeimā.".
- 2016_02_04_342-seq275 language "lv".
- 2016_02_04_342-seq275 speaker Andrejs_Elksnins-1982.
- 2016_02_04_342-seq275 translatedText "Dear colleague, in fact, in a word about what Lunzinas- Egneres has said, what is the proposal, what is the result of an offence? The violation of the Constitutional Court has acknowledged this, so today is the bill that Jo would have to work on if it had not been for everything, then the bill would not have been done once again. It is true that, if we do not support the provision of the relevant debate, on the basis of the Lobby-Egneres of the debate, we could say that we will then have the Constitution of the Constitutional Court to support this provision, orlet us not support this proposal - in any case, the Constitutional Court's verdict will only be implemented on the deadlines between time periods offered once again by one or the other wing in the Commons.".
- 2016_02_04_342-seq275 mentions Q822919.
- 2016_02_04_342-seq275 mentions Q2498135.
- 2016_02_04_342-seq274 type Speech.
- 2016_02_04_342-seq274 number "274".
- 2016_02_04_342-seq274 date "2016-02-04".
- 2016_02_04_342-seq274 isPartOf 2016_02_04_342.
- 2016_02_04_342-seq274 spokenAs 118.
- 2016_02_04_342-seq274 spokenText "Paldies. Debates slēdzu. Vai Elksniņa kungs bija pieteicies pirms debašu slēgšanas? Vārds deputātam Andrejam Elksniņam.".
- 2016_02_04_342-seq274 language "lv".
- 2016_02_04_342-seq274 speaker Inara_Murniece-1970.
- 2016_02_04_342-seq274 translatedText "Thank you for the conclusion of the debate by Mr Can Elin before the closing of the debate?".
- 2016_02_04_342-seq274 mentions Q9151087.
- 2016_02_04_342-seq273 type Speech.
- 2016_02_04_342-seq273 number "273".
- 2016_02_04_342-seq273 date "2016-02-04".
- 2016_02_04_342-seq273 isPartOf 2016_02_04_342.
- 2016_02_04_342-seq273 spokenAs 101.
- 2016_02_04_342-seq273 spokenText "Godātie kolēģi! Taupot jūsu visu laiku, es vēlos tiem, kuri nav izlasījuši šo Satversmes tiesas spriedumu, tomēr pateikt, ka Satversmes tiesas spriedumā nav atzīts, ka šis Saeimas lēmums maksātnespējas administratoriem iesniegt valsts amatpersonu deklarācijas vienmēr būtu vērtējams kā Satversmei neatbilstošs. Satversmes tiesa skatīja ļoti šauru aspektu, proti, zvērināta advokāta darbību kopsakarā ar to, ka viņi papildus veic arī maksātnespējas administratora darbu. Par to arī šobrīd Tieslietu ministrijas priekšlikums, lai atbilstoši Satversmes tiesas spriedumam šo šauro, mazo administratoru kopas daļu regulētu atbilstoši tam, kā Satversmes tiesa to redz. Un ir pietiekams termiņš, kurā izvērtēt, vai ir kaut kādi jauni samērīgāki, iespējams, mīkstinošāki apstākļi, lai visi viņu klienti, visa šī informācija, ko advokatūras noslēpums aizsargā, nebūtu pieejama, ja runa ir par procesiem, kas nav saistīti ar maksātnespēju. Ļoti skaidrs Satversmes tiesas spriedums. Protams, ir daži gan politiķi, gan juristi, gan arī maksātnespējas administratori, kuri no šī Satversmes tiesas sprieduma ir uztaisījuši burbuli, bubuli un vēl visu ko citu, - ka tagad Satversmes tiesa būtu atzinusi, ka Saeima ir pārkāpusi visu maksātnespējas administratoru tiesības slēpt savus ienākumus. Tā tas nav. Satversmes tiesas spriedums ir ļoti pārdomāts, manuprāt, ļoti vērtīgs pienesums, un ļoti augstu to vērtēju. Tāpēc ar šo priekšlikumu, ar kuru Tieslietu ministrija gan, manuprāt, novēloti ir nākusi no 22.decembra jau, - varbūt arī ātrāk varēja, nekā tikai šodien pulksten 9.45 iesniegt priekšlikumu. Bet, ja reiz mums šis priekšlikums šodien ir jāvētī, kolēģi, es aicinu to atbalstīt. Tas labos likumu tā, kā Satversmes tiesa to redz. Un mums būs gandrīz septiņi mēneši - līdz 1.septembrim -, lai atrastu šo samērīgāko risinājumu tieši attiecībā uz zvērinātiem advokātiem. Tā ka nevajag baidīties. Juridiski šis risinājums, manuprāt, ir ļoti labs. Satversmes tiesas spriedums ir jāpilda, ir jāievēro, un ar šo priekšlikumu atbalstīšanu mēs to arī izdarīsim. Paldies. (Aplausi.)".
- 2016_02_04_342-seq273 language "lv".
- 2016_02_04_342-seq273 speaker Inese_Libina-Egnere-1977.
- 2016_02_04_342-seq273 translatedText "Ladies and gentlemen, by saving you all the time, I would like to tell those who have not read the judgment of this Constitutional Court, but to say that the judgment of the Constitutional Court does not recognise that the decision of this House of insolvency administrators to submit declarations of state officials would always be welcome. The Constitutional Court of the Constitution saw very narrow aspects of the Constitution, namely, the work of the jury in conjunction with the fact that they are also in addition to the work of the Insolvency Administrator On to the Justice Department's proposal to bring this to the point of the Constitutional Court ruling. The narrow, small part of the administrators' regulation would be regulated under the way the Constitutional Court sees it as a sufficient time frame to assess whether there is any new proportionate, possibly softer conditions for all of their customers, all of which are by the Advokes. The secret to the defence would not be available when it comes to proceedings unrelated to the insolvency of a Very Constitutional Court ruling of course, there are some politicians, lawyers and administrators and insolvency administrators, who are also the default administrators of this Constitutional Courta bubble, a bogeyman and more of anything else - that the Constitutional Court now would have recognised that Saeima has breached the right of all insolvency administrators to conceal their income in the failure of the Constitutional Court's highly considerate, in my opinion, highly considerate, in my viewa valuable contribution, and very high for this proposal, which, I think, the Ministry of Justice, both in my view, has already come from 22 December, perhaps more quickly than just today at 9 45but, once we have this proposal today, colleagues, I call for it to be supported in this good law, the way the Constitutional Court sees it and we will have almost seven months - 1 September - to find thisthe most proportionate solution, specifically for attorneys in particular, is that, in my opinion, a very good judgment of the Constitutional Court is a very good one, that is to be complied with, and we will do so with the support of those proposals (applause)".
- 2016_02_04_342-seq273 mentions Q822919.
- 2016_02_04_342-seq273 mentions Q1771611.
- 2016_02_04_342-seq273 mentions Q2498135.
- 2016_02_04_342-seq272 type Speech.
- 2016_02_04_342-seq272 number "272".
- 2016_02_04_342-seq272 date "2016-02-04".
- 2016_02_04_342-seq272 isPartOf 2016_02_04_342.
- 2016_02_04_342-seq272 spokenAs 118.
- 2016_02_04_342-seq272 spokenText "Vārds deputātei Inesei Lībiņai-Egnerei.".
- 2016_02_04_342-seq272 language "lv".
- 2016_02_04_342-seq272 speaker Inara_Murniece-1970.