Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-11-28-Speech-3-086"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20011128.4.3-086"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Madam President, as we are talking about human rights, I would like to speak on an issue of method, which applies to all the association agreements. Today, a joint debate is going to take place on the association agreements with Egypt, and it will include oral questions and motions for resolutions. For the sake of a democratic debate and a more coherent vote on all the association agreements, it is important for it to be split into separate parts. We suggest that the debate should deal, first of all, with oral questions and resolutions and then, secondly, with the vote on the association agreements. It is neither logical nor coherent to take a position on these issues at the same time. The oral questions and resolutions are intended to question the political powers of these countries and to give them time to debate and respond to those questions. This two-part method allows us to confirm the fundamental importance that we attach to the whole agreement, particularly Article 2 on human rights. The example of Egypt is telling in that it shows that we do not silently accept a decision that constitutes a violation of human rights, the recent condemnation of homosexuals, and flouts the values that we defend in Article 2 of our agreements. Our group would therefore like to keep the debate and vote on oral questions and motions for resolutions in one part-session, and put the association agreements back to another part-session. We have already made a request to that effect by letter to the President."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples