Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-06-05-Speech-4-092"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2003-06-05"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Vote2
dcterms:Language	"de"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20030605.3.4-092"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2003-06-05-Speech-4-0932
lpv:speaker	lp:Bernd Posselt2
lpv:spokenAs	member; EPP-ED (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 substitute; Committee on Foreign Affairs, Human Rights, Common Security and Defence Policy (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3 member; Committee on Citizens' Freedoms and Rights, Justice and Home Affairs (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3 vice-chair; Delegation to the EU-Czech Republic Joint Parliamentary Committee (2002-02-07--2004-04-30)3 unknown; Christlich-Soziale Union in Bayern e.V. (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, I apologise for coming back to the same problem. I certainly do not wish to be difficult. However, the right to freedom of expression is highly protected. Even if, for example, the Conference of Presidents decides to deal with a report without debate, this decision can be overturned by 32 Members. Now though, a new procedure is creeping in. On Monday, we decide to debate a matter on Thursday afternoon and Members assume that this debate is going to take place. But on Thursday afternoon, a Member says that they do not wish to have the debate because they have to leave. That is what happened last time, and it happened this week too. The agenda stipulates that, if this happens, just one speaker should be called upon to speak for each group. But this procedure is not being followed either, and instead, we are referred to a rule which says that the agenda can also be changed on a proposal from the President. But firstly this was not a proposal from the President, secondly it must remain an exception, thirdly the President gave no reason, and fourthly I have to say that there was no important reason. When I asked you about it, your answer was simply that we needed ‘to keep some flexibility in our agenda’. This is about the right of freedom of expression, a right guaranteed to minorities. I would very much like the Bureau to clarify under what conditions the President can propose that a point be taken off an agenda that has been jointly decided by us on Monday, and whether or not he has to give his reasons for doing so. Otherwise this minority right will be regularly set aside on Thursday afternoons if there happens to be a majority vote in favour of it. Then we might as well forget all the articles protecting this minority right in the Rules of Procedure, particularly Article 111."@en1
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata	"(Applause)"1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph