Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-01-18-Speech-3-443"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20060118.26.3-443"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, my group is going to give this report its full support in the form it now takes following the approval of several amendments, and I would like to congratulate the rapporteur on the text on which we have finally been able to agree amongst all of us. The previous speakers have explained this very well and it would be impossible for me not to repeat some of their points.
This text basically rationalises the current system − which in itself is quite a task − it codifies but rationalises, it makes each person’s role much clearer and, above all, it achieves a balance between two extreme views.
The first is to see this as a parliament and not a school, nor a church and − please take this as a joke, Mr President − nor is it an opera house. It must have its vivacity, its movement, its people. Nevertheless, its operational rules must be obeyed and Parliament must be able to preserve the dignity of its role at all times.
It is intolerable − and I am going to give an example which scandalised me in particular, if you pardon the expression − to interrupt a formal sitting with a President, a Head of State, during his last speech, and probably one of his last political actions in Europe and in his political career. I am referring to the speech in this House by President Ciampi. That is intolerable. Other similar actions are totally unacceptable, too.
It is that that should be penalised, much more than a Member displaying some poster or other, or some little pamphlet, which in no way disrupts the work of the House.
On the one hand, therefore, vivacity, energy and contrasting ideas are fine – and these are sometimes expressed through shouting and other reactions that those of us from Latin Parliaments even believe are lacking, because simultaneous interpreting makes it difficult for us to laugh spontaneously or to react to a comment – but not to the point of losing the dignity of the role entrusted to us and of what each of us represents, which is much more than any one of us means individually. That is why we are here even at this time of night.
I believe that this balance is well reflected in the report that is going to be put to the vote tomorrow. There are proportionate penalties, there are guarantees for those who may be penalised, there are powers for the President, which are balanced against a right to appeal to the Bureau. I believe that all of this is a step forward.
My hope for this text is the best one can hope for a text of this nature: that it does not have to be applied. I hope that it stays where it is, that we all practically forget that it exists and that it goes unnoticed because it is not necessary to apply it. That would be the best possible result of having clear rules with regard to the internal discipline of this Parliament."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples