Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2011-12-14-Speech-3-508-000"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2011-12-14"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Freedom of movement for workers within the European Union (debate)2
dcterms:Language	"ro"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20111214.32.3-508-000"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2011-12-14-Speech-3-509-0002
lpv:speaker	lp:Traian Ungureanu2
lpv:spokenAs	member; Delegation to the EU-Moldova Parliamentary Cooperation Committee (2009-09-16--2014-06-30)3 vice-chair; Delegation to the Euronest Parliamentary Assembly (2009-09-30--2014-06-30)3 substitute; Delegation for relations with the countries of the Andean Community (2009-09-16--2014-06-30)3 substitute; DROI (2009-07-16--2012-01-18)3 member; EPP (2009-07-14--2014-06-30)3 member; EMPL (2009-07-16--2012-01-18)3 unknown; Partidul Democrat-Liberal (2009-07-14--2014-06-30)3 substitute; AFET (2009-07-16--2012-01-18)3
lpv:translated text	"Madam President, this is about an oral question and a motion for a resolution. What I would say about both the oral question and the joint motion for a resolution is that they put forward two basic propositions. Firstly, that the restrictions for Romanian and Bulgarian workers on the European labour market should be lifted, as there is no real economic reason to keep them in place, and I quote here from a fresh report from the Commission. Secondly, the oral question and the motion for a resolution are asking for the states that want to exercise their right to extend the barriers to provide hard economic data in support of their request. Since this whole debate was sometimes misunderstood or misrepresented, I have to state what the question and the motion for a resolution are not about. Firstly, they are not about changing Treaties or any other kind of legislation. They only ask for legislation to be implemented with good reason and not implemented at all when there is no reason. Secondly, the question and the motion are not about encouraging vagueness. On the contrary, they propose more transparency, which is to say that from now on, Member States should not be able to limit the fundamental rights of fellow European citizens by simply invoking a vague formula – by ticking a box. This sort of behaviour is neither rational nor legal: it is pure imposition. For those who wondered whether Romanians and Bulgarians could really not wait for another two years, the answer is no. When the issue is your rights, sometimes even a day can be too long. Finally, the question and the motion push for full European consistency. I therefore have to ask: why maintain an arrangement that allows goods and capital to move freely towards East European Member States while stopping East European citizens taking up jobs in Western European countries?"@en1
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata	"Traian Ungureanu,"1 "author."1
lpv:videoURI	<go to Events_and_structure europarl>2

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph