joint resolution

Just look at all the questions we ask in the present joint resolution.

We do not support the joint resolution, and let me explain why.

Since the joint resolution does not take that line we cannot support it.

That is something else on which we agree, and this joint resolution says so.

I wish to state once again the main points of our joint resolution.

I would urge the House to support the joint resolution.

I have to say to them: if you believe that, why is it not in your joint resolution?

I would like to highlight these two points in our joint resolution.

In any case, we are not going to start voting on the joint resolution.

The standards that we want have been set out clearly in the joint resolution.

For this reason let us remove Point 2 from the joint resolution.

The Green amendments to the joint resolution will say all these things.

The joint resolution would be read in the chamber for the third and last time.

That is why I voted in support of the joint resolution.

There is little practical difference between a bill and a joint resolution.

In this specific case, I feel, however, that the joint resolution goes beyond what is necessary.

The act served as more of a joint resolution than an actual law.

But until today, they had not resolved whether that could be done through a joint resolution or a bill.

The only possible compromise was to say nothing at all on the subject in the joint resolution.

Their report ended the perceived need for the joint resolution.

Two points in this joint resolution of six parliamentary groups particularly hold my attention.

That is our basic reason for not voting on the joint resolution.

The Green group supports the text of the joint resolution.

It would take a joint resolution and a small appropriation.

We have drawn up a joint resolution which covers the most important points.