Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2004-12-15-Speech-3-165"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20041215.3.3-165"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
The fact that this report was passed so narrowly in the committee concerned shows that the rapporteur deviated from the European Strategy against drugs, by proposing a solution that, to my mind, does not solve the problem, but rather exacerbates it.
It is nothing new in this House to see Members try to put liberalisation forward as a solution, to see the notion of damage limitation as the be-all-and-end-all and to speak the language of surrender when it comes to drug trafficking. This practice already has a notable history, with the common thread being that it is up to the Member States to enforce it – at complete variance with the subsidiarity principle, which must continue to apply to this issue – despite the need to coordinate the fight against drugs.
The slackness and decriminalisation that have been proposed are well known ways of removing responsibility from the public authorities and are a false ally of those whose drive and judgment have been subdued by the effects of drugs, and therefore constitute a deeply flawed message to give to the youngest members of society.
It is ironic that the rapporteur cites fundamental rights and claims to fight against an ‘ideological approach’ to this subject, in order to justify a highly ideological position that, strictly speaking, runs counter to basic fundamental rights."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples