Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-02-02-Speech-3-024"

PredicateValue (sorted: default)
rdf:type
dcterms:Date
dcterms:Is Part Of
dcterms:Language
lpv:document identification number
"en.20000202.4.3-024"2
lpv:hasSubsequent
lpv:speaker
lpv:spokenAs
lpv:translated text
"Madam President, the events taking place today in Austria are extremely serious. For the first time, the European Union is facing the possibility of having representatives in the Council of Ministers and here among us of a party which obviously holds views and puts forward legislation contrary to the values of the European Union. Finally I should like to address the party which, whether we like it or not, is the target of our comments: the PPE/DE. I would like to address Mr Poettering and also, indirectly, Mr Martens, a compatriot and former colleague. I have heard, Mr Poettering, that you have been following events in Austria. I would rather have had you anticipate them and, particularly, condemn, on behalf of your party, the very principle of an alliance with people who practice verbal violence, who stigmatise the weak, who hold xenophobic views and who refuse to condemn the Nazi regime. Mr Poettering, I do not doubt your concern for democracy but I believe that you are making a serious political mistake. And, to paraphrase one of my renowned fellow Belgians, one of the founders of Europe, Paul-Henri Spaak, I shall say that it is not yet too late for you, but now is the time to change your mind. I shall make three comments on this matter, to illustrate the gravity of the problem. I believe, personally, that this is the first stage, if it does actually take place, in the inclusion of extremists in governments becoming quite commonplace. I also believe it gives an extremely negative political message to the vulnerable democracies which are candidates for membership of the European Union and which are going to join us. I feel, finally, that this is a case of political decline of the European Union as such and it therefore also sends a negative message outside the Union, when we are speaking in the name of democracy and human rights. Some people have said that we were interfering in problems internal to Austria. Some people have said that we were stigmatising the Austrian people and that we were effectively putting words into the mouth of a future government. Is it really putting words into someone’s mouth, if we pay attention to what a political leader has been saying for many years, when it shows an obvious tendency to go against everything that we want? We are not putting words into someone’s mouth or stigmatising the Austrian people if we send a friendly message, saying: friends, beware of what may soon happen in your country and what may contaminate the whole of Europe: not a radical change – I think Mr Haider is too intelligent for that – but a gradual erosion of democratic rights, a slow erosion, by cultural contagion, and that is extremely dangerous. Let me thank you, Madam President, for your contribution on behalf of Parliament. It was both pertinent and politically intelligent. I should also like to thank the Presidency of the Council for the firm, pertinent and moderate statement it has made."@en1
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata

Named graphs describing this resource:

1http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/English.ttl.gz
2http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/Events_and_structure.ttl.gz
3http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/spokenAs.ttl.gz

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph