Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-11-14-Speech-2-040"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2000-11-14"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Charter of Fundamental Rights2
dcterms:Language	"it"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20001114.2.2-040"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2000-11-14-Speech-2-0412
lpv:speaker	lp:Elena Ornella Paciotti2
lpv:spokenAs	member; Delegation for relations with the Mashreq countries and the Gulf (1999-10-06--2002-01-14)3 unknown; Democratici di Sinistra (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 member; Committee on Women's Rights and Equal Opportunities (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 substitute; Temporary committee on the Echelon interception system (2000-07-06--2001-09-05)3 member; PES (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 member; Committee on Citizens' Freedoms and Rights, Justice and Home Affairs (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 substitute; Committee on Legal Affairs and the Internal Market (1999-07-22--2002-01-14)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, the proposal and adoption of the draft Charter of Fundamental Rights should meet with very broad consensus. In my opinion, the only people who can justify voting against the adoption of the Charter are those who are against the European Union, as some of those who have spoken today clearly are. I do not understand how anyone can reject the Charter because it does not cover everything which they would like it to. The hopes of no one person here have been fully realised because the Charter cannot mirror the views of one section of the population alone, it must be the common point of reference of all those who feel that they are European citizens, in respect for the differences of others and peaceful co-existence. Could we have done better? I think so, if only because not everything I proposed was accepted. In this case, would it be better not to do anything? Should we reject the Charter? Certainly not! I repeat, this Charter turns the Union into a Community of rights; it is a step forwards in the process of constitutionalisation of the Union and it is the first international document to contain, according to the principle of the indivisibility of fundamental rights, civil and political rights, economic and social rights and new rights, all together. I fail to understand those who say that it is useless and that it is made up of nothing but generalisations and fine words. To assert this is to disregard the history of the institutions: 'liberty, equality, fraternity’ are also fine words, but they formed the basis of many of Europe's legal systems. It is on the basis of formulae such as these articles that, in time, our law-courts guaranteed our fundamental rights. Let us leave it to cynical reactionaries to maintain that only strength or money count for anything and that anything else is merely words. No, the words which embody our principles, our values and our fundamental rights are powerful if we embrace them and apply them to our civil lifestyles. Therefore, let us adopt the Charter and take the words it contains seriously, let us prevent them being diluted, undervalued or ignored. We must take our rights seriously if we want governments to respect them and legal systems to guarantee them."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph