Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-04-09-Speech-3-093"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2003-04-09"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Vote2
dcterms:Language	"pt"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20030409.4.3-093"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2003-04-09-Speech-3-0942
lpv:speaker	lp:José Ribeiro E Castro2
lpv:spokenAs	member; Committee on Citizens' Freedoms and Rights, Justice and Home Affairs (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3 member; UEN (1999-11-17--2004-07-19)3 substitute; AFCO (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3 member; Members from the European Parliament to the Joint Parliamentary Assembly of the Agreement between the African, Caribbean and Pacific States and the European Union (ACP-EU) (2002-02-06--2004-07-19)3 unknown; Partido Popular (1999-11-17--2004-07-19)3
lpv:translated text	". The observations I made in the explanation of vote on the Turco report also apply in this case. In fact, the misguided ideological reasons underlying the issue that has been raised stand out even more clearly here. It is quite astounding that Mr von Boetticher claims expressly in his explanatory statement, that he ‘acknowledges the significance of the Danish proposal as it seems to take a step in the right direction’ – only then to conclude that he must recommend rejecting it! Why? Because he believes it would be a mistake to adopt amendments to the Europol Convention ‘prior to the ratification of the European Constitution’! This assessment is misguided. It is both possible and necessary to move ahead within the current framework and this is where we ought to participate responsibly and, incidentally, keeping to the method of taking small steps, since this is the method that has ensured the success of European integration. This was precisely the approach adopted in the proposals put forward by the Danish and Greek Presidencies. The rapporteurs, however, would have needed... a Constitution. The line that is proposed constitutes a serious deviation from the agenda. I have therefore rejected it, as a way of expressing my support for pursuing the Danish initiative. The radical approach that has been adopted is extremely negative and clearly disregards the interests of the European citizens. Parliament should pursue the initiative, suggesting responsibly whatever amendments it considers appropriate, whilst strictly respecting the current legal framework. This is precisely what the rule of law is and we could do worse than show an example."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph