Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-03-13-Speech-2-172"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2001-03-13"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Final agreement on the reform of the system for international transfers of footballers2
dcterms:Language	"pt"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20010313.12.2-172"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2001-03-13-Speech-2-1732
lpv:speaker	lp:José Ribeiro E Castro2
lpv:spokenAs	member; UEN (1999-11-17--2004-07-19)3 substitute; AFCO (2000-05-23--2002-01-14)3 vice-chair; EMPL (1999-12-02--2002-01-14)3 member; Delegation for relations with the People's Republic of China (1999-12-09--2002-01-14)3 unknown; Partido Popular (1999-11-17--2004-07-19)3
lpv:translated text	"Commissioner, you concluded your first speech by commenting that this agreement demonstrates that it will not be necessary to change the Treaty to take account of the special features of sport and of football. In order words, you said that the Commission too recognises the special character of sport. Now, my question is this: that being so, why was it that before Nice the Commission did not press for the special character of sport to be included in the Treaty alongside culture, and in fact seemed to be opposed to including this in the Treaty? The fact is that they are not the same, because there may still be some uncertainty here. The ruling by the Court of Justice on some of the points that were settled and on others that still have to be resolved is still vulnerable and, in fact, the specific character of sport in general and of football in particular will not be safeguarded until they are clearly and specifically recognised in the Treaties. So I would like to ask you if the Commission still maintains that it is neither necessary nor helpful to have a clear reference in the Treaty to the special character of sport."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph