Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2008-07-07-Speech-1-203"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2008-07-07"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Formation of political groups (amendment of Rule 29) (debate)2
dcterms:Language	"fr"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20080707.21.1-203"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2008-07-07-Speech-1-2042
lpv:speaker	lp:Francis Wurtz2
lpv:spokenAs	member; Conference of Presidents (2006-12-13--2009-07-13)3 substitute; BUDG (2007-01-31--2009-07-13)3 substitute; Delegation to the Euro-Mediterranean Parliamentary Assembly (2004-09-15--2009-07-13)3 chair; EUL/NGL (2004-07-20--2009-07-13)3 substitute; Delegation for relations with the United States (2007-03-14--2009-07-13)3 unknown; Parti communiste français (2004-07-20--2009-07-13)3 member; Delegation to the Euro-Latin American Parliamentary Assembly (2007-05-23--2009-07-13)3 substitute; AFET (2007-12-12--2009-07-13)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, let us face facts. The history of European integration, its dominant ideological currents, practices inherited from half a century of close cooperation within the Commission, the Council and Parliament – all this has resulted in a sort of Christian Democratic-Social Democratic condominium within the European institutions. I am not passing judgement here; I am simply stating a fact. In this Parliament, the qualified majority necessary for the adoption of any legislative text at codecision means a constant search for consensus between the two main groups, which further marginalises the expression of differences and divergences. The question is therefore simple: do we want to exacerbate this tendency to avoid conflict by tightening the conditions imposed for the formation of political groups, on the eve of elections that will see the number of MEPs per country decrease, therefore further penalising minority groups, particularly in the least populated countries? How credible would these professions of faith in favour of pluralism be then? The quality of the democratic debate will not be improved by swelling the ranks of non-attached members. This is why my group is unanimously in favour of maintaining the current rules on the formation of political groups, even though our opinions differ when it comes to the refusal of the two main groups to accommodate our request concerning the procedures to follow: acknowledge the disagreement or accept a compromise. The majority of my group – including me – has now spoken out in favour of the compromise in a sole bid to help perpetuate pluralist expression within this Parliament, yet with the utmost respect for those who think differently, because at the end of the day we share the same principles. These principles have a name, and that name is democracy."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph