Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-04-27-Speech-4-043"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2006-04-27"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Promoting multilingualism and language learning in the EU (debate)2
dcterms:Language	"pt"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20060427.3.4-043"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2006-04-27-Speech-4-0442
lpv:speaker	lp:Miguel Portas2
lpv:spokenAs	member; Delegation for relations with the Mashreq countries (2004-09-15--2007-03-13)3 member; CULT (2004-07-21--2007-01-14)3 substitute; Delegation for relations with the Palestinian Legislative Council (2004-09-15--2007-03-13)3 unknown; Bloco de Esquerda (2004-07-20--2009-07-13)3 substitute; Delegation to the Euro-Mediterranean Parliamentary Assembly (2004-09-15--2009-07-13)3 member; EUL/NGL (2004-07-20--2009-07-13)3 substitute; AFET (2004-07-21--2007-01-14)3
lpv:translated text	". The creation of a European indicator of language competence is something on which we can all agree. That being said, there are some comments I should like to make. The Commission explains that the Indicator will be obtained by written exams, ‘for practical reasons’. I understand this, but I cannot understand why those same practical reasons are behind the decision to assess, and I quote, ‘the five most widely-spoken languages in the EU’. The Indicator thus obtained would run counter to the Barcelona Summit objectives, because the choice of languages establishes working guidelines for Member States interested in obtaining results. The objective that we share, that every child should learn to speak at least two languages apart from their mother tongue, can be assessed. Please note, Mr Figel', the Indicator is obtained by sample and via written exams. There is no practical reason why people should not be able to learn any language in the EU area. If the tests are applied to the world of languages, the conclusions might be surprising. One might find, for example, that Turkish, Arabic, Chinese and Russian are important languages in the Union and that the children of immigrants are the closest to being able to speak two languages in addition to their mother tongue. This is why we voted in favour of the Resetarits amendments. I should briefly like to make a second comment. The Indicator should not be confused with the certificate of language knowledge. The harmonisation of language certificates is not a cultural measure and is not socially neutral. With populist policies and public opinion divided over immigration policy, such a measure could legitimise discriminatory policies of selecting immigrants, to the detriment of the poorest countries in the Union."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph