Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-09-06-Speech-3-028"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20000906.1.3-028"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, for the first time in my career as a Member of the European Parliament, I am happy in the certain knowledge that the Council will give Parliament‘s misguided and dangerous opinion the consideration it deserves, i.e. none at all!
Commissioner Vitorino, although I hold you in high regard – and have said as much on many occasions in this House – the Commission document itself is shot through with negligent ignorance as to the situation in the very Member States that have been generous enough to accord large numbers of refugees and asylum seekers the right to protection and hospitality over the past few years. You ask too much of our society, and in so doing, run the risk of creating a breeding ground for something that we have always fought against in this House. The liberal and social democrat delegates from the large Member States – because so far today, I have only heard speakers of this political persuasion from the small Member States – must ask themselves whether they are remotely in touch with the electorate, whether they are aware of the consequences, and whether they have grasped that more authority for Parliament in these matters would also bring increased responsibility.
The age is past when we could hold forth here on our dreams for making the world a better place, without repercussions. I would be very interested to see how you intend to justify today’s decision to your electorate. Many of you will only vote in favour of this proposal today because you know full well that the Council will never endorse it as it stands. I feel this is unworthy of you. It is contrary to our task and to the mandate we have been given by the electorate.
I would just like to briefly pick up on the comments you made about polygamous marriages, which caused you to shake your head. For goodness sake, go and read Article 3, paragraph 2, which says: therefore, whilst it is not permissible to bring in several wives and their children, it is, on the other hand, permissible to bring in one wife and her children. This means I could have married someone here in the Member States, and would be at liberty, under certain circumstances, to have at least one more wife join me. In other words, there is admissibility. That is the fact of the matter. In this way, it would be possible….
... no, that is precisely how it can be interpreted in legal terms! It gives free rein to all kinds of interpretations. There is only one thing we can do here, and that is reject this proposal."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples