Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-03-16-Speech-4-272"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2000-03-16"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Vote (continuation)2
dcterms:Language	"de"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20000316.10.4-272"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2000-03-16-Speech-4-2732
lpv:speaker	lp:Hans-Gert Pöttering2
lpv:spokenAs	member; Delegation for relations with the countries of Central America and Mexico (1999-10-06--2000-10-04)3 chair; EPP-ED (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 unknown; Christlich Demokratische Union Deutschlands (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 member; Conference of Presidents (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 member; Committee on Foreign Affairs, Human Rights, Common Security and Defence Policy (1999-10-07--2002-01-14)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, this is the first explanation of vote which I have given in many years and my first explanation of vote as chairman of the EPP-ED Group. Unfortunately, our Group was unable, for a number of fundamental reasons, to vote in favour of the Ludford report on countering racism and xenophobia in the European Union. We take the view that a good cause, namely the fight against racism and xenophobia, is being abused for extraneous objectives and that the report deals with topics which have nothing to do with racism and the fight against racism and xenophobia. Most of our group therefore abstained or voted against. Our reasons were as follows. Firstly: the Ludford report flouts and violates the underlying principle of subsidiarity by calling in points 4, 6, 27 second indent, 11 and 20 for measures such as the recruitment of third country nationals to public office or formal requirements to change curricula and teacher training programmes. Secondly: the report deals with matters which have absolutely nothing to do with the subject of the report by calling in points 19, 22 and 30 for measures such as rights for third country nationals to vote in local and European elections. Thirdly: the Ludford report addresses matters which lie outside the time framework of the report and have nothing whatsoever to do with the report. And I want – and I would prefer if more people listened, especially those who are about to leave – I want to highlight the absurdity of this report and I regret having to say this about this report in particular. Its absurdity lies in the fact that not only fewer than one-third of the members voted, but a statement was made about a Member State of the European Union, namely Austria, a statement to the effect that Parliament subscribes to the sanctions of the fourteen Member States. Parliament decided by a large majority, following a passionate debate in February in Brussels, not to subscribe to these sanctions and today, with such a small minority, with so few present, we are subscribing to these sanctions. There are two reasons for this: first, because it is an issue which is extraneous to the subject of the report and, secondly, because we are dealing with an issue which was decided a long time ago by a large majority. I consider that unacceptable. My Group has therefore been compelled either to abstain or to vote against the report."@en1
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata	"(Applause)"1 "(Protests)"1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph