Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-10-27-Speech-5-037"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20001027.2.5-037"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, the debate on this question, which goes beyond Italy, is a highly interesting and most important debate. When we refer in recital C of the resolution to the three judgments, which state that the rights of the persons affected under the freedom of movement of labour in the Union and their rights not to be exposed to discrimination on the basis of their nationality were violated by Italy's omissions and when the ombudsman and numerous speakers here confirm this, then the argument of one of the previous speakers, namely that the violation can be justified on the grounds of subsidiarity does not stand up.
When the European Court of Justice finds that European law has been violated, this cannot be countered by invoking the principle of subsidiarity. The second point is that this is, without doubt, a political debate because it is about the violation of the law. The legal status of the Treaties cannot be played off against politics; on the contrary, it is our duty, should this happen, to hold a political debate in the House on the violation of the law. I think that the saying “If you don't take yourself seriously, no-one else will” is most apt here. When there are three judgments in a case by the European Court of Justice and the country in question still fails to change its conduct, then we must intervene; we must make it public. We discussed the Charter of Fundamental Rights here in the House a few days ago. Surely compliance with current law is the very first fundamental right which can be demanded of us? Surely promoting the community based on law is the basis for the European community of values? You cannot play one off against the other.
Obviously education still comes under subsidiarity but, within the framework of the Treaties, the freedom of movement of workers and the ban on discrimination apply to everyone, although we – and I in particular, coming as I do from a highly federalist state – support the principle of subsidiarity as a principle of order in our dealings with the European Union and do what we can so that powers are divided as quickly as possible between the levels in Europe in accordance with the principle of subsidiarity. Italy's conduct in this matter runs counter to the objectives of the Community and runs counter to our desire to increase the mobility and flexibility of workers. The diversity of cultures, which we see as a fundamental element of Europe, finds expression first and foremost in the diversity of languages. Anyone who stands up for the diversity of cultures must do what they can so that we can maintain the diversity of languages and learn them everywhere.
We support the internal economic market. I say that also as a member of the Committee on Culture, Youth, Education, Media and Sport: the internal economic market needs the internal educational market. There are still many fetters and many obstacles to this internal market, as today's debate has shown, and not just in this case. We should do everything to remove these fetters as quickly as possible."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples