Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-09-03-Speech-3-187"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2003-09-03"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Fundamental rights in the EU in 20022
dcterms:Language	"fr"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20030903.8.3-187"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2003-09-03-Speech-3-1882
lpv:speaker	lp:Thierry Cornillet2
lpv:spokenAs	member; EPP-ED (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 substitute; Committee on Industry, External Trade, Research and Energy (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3 member; Committee on Citizens' Freedoms and Rights, Justice and Home Affairs (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3 member; Delegation for relations with Australia and New Zealand (2002-02-07--2004-07-19)3 unknown; Union pour la démocratie française (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 vice-president; 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
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, I would like to congratulate Mr Sylla on his work and would also like to make two comments regarding the method I feel should be used for this report. First of all, I would like to remind you that this is the third report since an extremely important reform, which Parliament desired, which involves looking at the situation of fundamental rights in the Union in light of the Charter, and this implies a number of obligations. We have established the means – a network of experts that produces a report, normally a collective working group – but the catchword is above all the Charter and nothing but the Charter. That naturally requires the rapporteur and all those who would like this report to be adopted with broad support to ensure that it is not a pretext for political activism, that it is not an opportunity to put forward personal opinions, and that it is not a forerunner for action by lobbies that are totally unrelated. Nothing but the Charter, but all of the Charter! It is a principle that must be reasserted, as far as I am concerned. My second comment relates to the countries. This report is divided into two parts, according to EU regulation. In reality, the report forms a whole and, thus, the resolution should contain only the true substance of the report and highlight only what Parliament would like the public to remember. That would prevent nationalist reactions on the part of some of our colleagues who do not agree with their country being mentioned. Also from this point of view, it would be in our interest to ensure that the resolution contains only the important points, those that correspond, in fact, to the reasons why Parliament decided to draw up this report. It decided to draw up the report as a guardian of public liberties and so that it could answer the following question: was the Charter of Fundamental Rights as written, and not as one would like it to be written, respected during the year in question throughout the Union? That is the aim of the report. It is very important not to forget these aspects concerning the method if we want the report to be adopted with as broad a political foundation as possible."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph