Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-11-14-Speech-2-026"

PredicateValue (sorted: default)
rdf:type
dcterms:Date
dcterms:Is Part Of
dcterms:Language
lpv:document identification number
"en.20001114.2.2-026"2
lpv:hasSubsequent
lpv:speaker
lpv:spokenAs
lpv:translated text
"Madam President, I do not underestimate the very important ambition of establishing a community of humanitarian values or the fact that civil, political and social rights have been placed on a par for the first time in this type of text. I also see the method instigated with the Convention as innovatory with regard to ensuring greater information and greater transparency. Despite all that, however, there is a major source of dissatisfaction. There is a significant gap between our initial ambitions and what we have actually achieved. It is, of course, possible to highlight this or that article, to welcome the genuine progress made in affirming a number of new rights relating to developments in our societies or in reaffirming crucial fundamental rights. It is also possible to pinpoint articles which fall a long way short of the rights acknowledged elsewhere, particular in social issues. We should not be drawing up lists of advantages and disadvantages, Madam President. Last time, you spoke of the glass being half full or half empty. We should instead be looking at the Charter in terms of its overall approach and ambition and asking ourselves whether it actually lives up to the demands and expectations of the citizens of Europe and whether it provides them with adequate support to confront the challenges of the age. Well, I have read the text. I have read it again and again. It is, indeed, a text that is easy to read. I have heard the arguments put forward by my fellow Members, but I still think that the Charter contains some ambiguous provisions that are very dangerous and that the common denominator is still the lowest possible one. Finally, in spite of the innovative approach of the Convention method, which I have mentioned, things must be stated openly. The citizens of Europe have continued to be insufficiently informed and if they had been consulted, as should have been necessary, in order to contribute towards drawing up the Charter, then its content would almost certainly have been rather different. It is never too late to set things right. Nice should not be just the finish line for the Charter, an opportunity to express self-satisfaction. It would be wise to also make it the starting point for the widest possible “citizens’ debate” regarding this so important issue of fundamental rights. Finally, precisely because the decision on the Charter is a major political decision, I am with those Members of the House that think it premature for Parliament to declare its opinion today."@en1

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