Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/1999-11-16-Speech-2-118"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"1999-11-16"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Judicial cooperation2
dcterms:Language	"de"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.19991116.7.2-118"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:1999-11-16-Speech-2-1192
lpv:speaker	lp:Klaus-Heiner Lehne2
lpv:spokenAs	unknown; Christlich Demokratische Union Deutschlands (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 substitute; Committee on Citizens' Freedoms and Rights, Justice and Home Affairs (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 vice-chair; Delegation to the EU-Russia Parliamentary Cooperation Committee (1999-07-22--2002-01-14)3 member; Committee on Legal Affairs and the Internal Market (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 member; EPP-ED (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, I rise to speak about the Gebhardt report on judicial cooperation in family affairs. Anyone who comes into contact with judges and registrars in the cross-border areas of our Member States will know that this is a problem that urgently requires solving. For a long time, there has been an increasing number – and thankfully one that continues to increase – of marriages and familial relationships between people from different European countries. Naturally, this often results in a number of problems. There are also more and more people moving or emigrating from one country of the European Union to another in order to live and work there. It is indeed the case that the current provisions pertaining to family law and also the international regulations on this subject are simply not adequate to deal with this problem. I would therefore like to join Mrs Gebhardt in offering special praise to the Council and Commission for their initiative in taking a decisive step towards solving this problem. This is indeed urgently necessary. Moreover, in my opinion the shortcomings that the document reveals are positively limited. There is a range of lesser aspects that have also been addressed in the committee discussions. For example, I still to this day do not fully understand why negative judgements should have been excluded from the scope of this regulation. In my opinion, this is particularly problematic, since the fact that negative judgements are not binding in all States may ultimately mean that a State in which a negative judgement is made may not recognise a positive judgement made in another state, with the result that we are once again faced with the disintegration of what constitutes law in the European Union, which, of course, we do not want. I would ask that the Council to reconsider this aspect in its further discussions on this subject and that it consider whether this problem cannot indeed be resolved. In all other respects, I support the initiative; I think that it is a good one and think that it should be pursued."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph