Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2004-10-13-Speech-3-107"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2004-10-13"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Future of the area of freedom, security and justice2
dcterms:Language	"de"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20041013.6.3-107"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2004-10-13-Speech-3-1082
lpv:speaker	lp:Ewa Klamt2
lpv:spokenAs	member; LIBE (2004-07-21--2007-01-14)3 substitute; BUDG (2004-07-22--2007-01-14)3 substitute; Delegation for relations with the countries of South Asia and the South Asia Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) (2004-09-15--2007-03-13)3 substitute; PECH (2004-07-22--2007-01-14)3 member_of_the_bureau; EPP-ED (2004-08-31--2007-02-14)3 member; Delegation for relations with Australia and New Zealand (2004-09-15--2007-03-13)3 unknown; Christlich Demokratische Union Deutschlands (2004-07-20--2009-07-13)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, in view of the short time I have in which to speak, I will limit myself to one important demand in the area of freedom, security and justice, that being for discrimination of every kind to be combated. In his report, Mr Bourlanges is right to demand that the Charter of Fundamental Rights be made the pillar of future policy and, to quote him, that they – that is, the fundamental rights – should be ‘applied everywhere and at all times with the same rigour’. In the case of many Members of this House, however, these lofty principles fail them when it comes to decisions at home. Freedom of opinion? – yes, that is self-evident, but the opinion must accord with the views of the Member in question. If not, then the dissidents can expect, at least, to be banned from any participation in the work of the European Union. They are then left, at best – if I may use our President, Mr Borrell’s words – to look after beetroots. Freedom of religion? – of course; it is one of our fundamental freedoms, but you should, if at all possible, be a Shintoist, a Confucian, a Moslem, a Buddhist or a Wahhabi. If you are a Christian, or a Catholic, then Social Democrats, Liberals, Greens and Communists will declare that such antiquated thinking makes you incapable of implementing the values of the European Union. Anti-discrimination? You are allowed to be incapable, but not to be a Christian. If that is not discrimination, what is? It is a tragic irony that certain members of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs, while fondly imagining themselves to be a bulwark in defence of fundamental freedoms and rights, are at present treading these rights underfoot. Mr Bourlanges’ fine report should encourage us, for we may demand much, but it is for each of us as individuals to act in accordance with the standards we ourselves set."@en1
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata	"(Applause)"1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph