Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2008-07-07-Speech-1-200"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20080707.21.1-200"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Mr President, the committee, as we know, tries to be consensual, but tonight the consensus has broken apart, and I have a strong objection to Mr Corbett’s proposal on the grounds of both principle and practice.
I simply cannot accept that the existence of seven groups inside Parliament creates a particular problem of efficiency. Lessons drawn from national parliaments can only take us so far. Here we should reflect on the more complex and wider spread of public opinion from 27 countries. In fact, it is critical at this sensitive phase of integration that all sorts of minority opinions can organise themselves professionally to express themselves in an articulate fashion. Groups contribute to, and do not impede, the work of the assembly.
Mr Corbett’s proposal and also the compromise would have the effect of closing the UEN and the IND/DEM Groups. Now frequently, perhaps always, I disagree with the opinions of those groups, but they have a perfect right to express their opinions and they certainly represent a specific strand of public opinion.
Should we close them, their members will be forced to join a larger group, thereby complicating affairs and increasing the incoherence of those groups. Alternatively, they will swell the ranks of the
.
So, to conclude, and in the interests of efficiency, pluralism, coherence, fairness and liberalism, please support the committee’s position and reject the amendments."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
"non-inscrits"1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples