Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-09-06-Speech-3-023"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2000-09-06"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Right to family reunification2
dcterms:Language	"de"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20000906.1.3-023"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2000-09-06-Speech-3-0242
lpv:speaker	lp:Hubert Pirker2
lpv:spokenAs	member; EPP-ED (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 member; Committee on Citizens' Freedoms and Rights, Justice and Home Affairs (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 unknown; Österreichische Volkspartei (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 member; Delegation for relations with the Member States of ASEAN, South-east Asia and the Republic of Korea (1999-10-06--2002-01-14)3 substitute; EMPL (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 substitute; Delegation to the EU-Slovenia Joint Parliamentary Committee (1999-10-08--2002-01-14)3 member; Temporary committee on the Echelon interception system (2000-07-06--2001-09-05)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, Commissioner, the present document, like the report, is a labelling con. The wording on the outside belies the actual contents of these documents. We would be delighted to endorse family reunification measures, for this would be deeply humane and would also be key to an integration component, but what we have is something entirely different. This is about initiating sociopolitical debate on how far the circle of those entitled to family reunification can be extended beyond the core family. You include a proposal relating to unmarried partners, whose parents and children would be allowed to join them, according to which, testimonies from the country of origin would be enough to satisfy you as to the authenticity of a relationship, regardless as to how it appears. This would mean that children or parents joining members here would have the same rights as EU citizens in the educational, employment and social spheres. The traffickers in human beings and the document forgers will thank those of you who support this proposal, and you can rest assured that the general public’s response will be one of indignation. You also include a proposal relating to multiple marriages, i.e. the first wife is to be accepted along with the children and relatives in the ascending line. However, you also make the point in this document that naturally it would be possible to bring another wife and her dependants in, if this were necessary for the sake of the child’s welfare. This begs the question as to how much wider the door is to be opened to uncontrollable immigration? As far as we are concerned, the proposal under discussion is unacceptable. It lacks an overall frame of reference, a statistical basis and there is no differentiation. You are also overstepping the mark in respect of the Treaty of Amsterdam, which requires the integration capacity of each of the Member States to be taken into account. We have no intention of voting for this document unless it includes our amendments and follows our political line."@en1
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata	"(Applause from the right)"1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph