Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-10-01-Speech-1-017"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2001-10-01"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Statement by the President2
dcterms:Language	"it"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20011001.2.1-017"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2001-10-01-Speech-1-0182
lpv:speaker	lp:Giacomo Santini2
lpv:spokenAs	member; Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy (2001-06-14--2002-01-14)3 member; EPP-ED (2001-06-14--2004-07-19)3 member; Delegation to the EU-Slovenia Joint Parliamentary Committee (2001-09-27--2002-01-14)3 unknown; Forza Italia (2001-06-14--2004-07-19)3 substitute; Delegation to the EU-Malta Joint Parliamentary Committee (2001-09-27--2002-01-14)3
lpv:translated text	"Madam President, it is a matter of great surprise and regret to me that the Chairman of a major political group such as the Group of the Party of European Socialists should get caught up in the false, subversive controversy which originated in the Italian political debate and which it is absurd to think could be continued in this House. The issue has already been thoroughly addressed in Italy and it is certainly not evidence of a problem at European level but merely of a misunderstanding or, worse, the subversive interpretation of a phrase which could have been interpreted differently. Moreover, the Italian Prime Minister, Mr Berlusconi, has provided ample explanation of what he meant by the statement, which he intended to be extremely positive. The difference between the two civilisations is clear, and his intention was merely to highlight and emphasise that there is a great difference as regards genuine freedom, which exists in the West but not in the East, as regards equal opportunities for men and women, which are established in the West but denied in the East, and as regards all those differences in civilisation which – it cannot be denied – are there. That was what Mr Berlusconi meant by his statement, but, of course, everyone has read and interpreted it in their own way. Madam President, I would go so far as to say that it would be dangerous for this House to focus on a statement such as this now: at such a sensitive time as this, we need clarity, transparency and positive thinking – not a vitriolic debate – and, most importantly, we have to have the ability, which I do not see in the opposition, to extend a hand and interpret what people say in the positive sense intended rather than always placing a negative interpretation on things. It is therefore our intention to oppose any initiative seeking to open an interim procedure in this House, as has been suggested."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph