Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-09-27-Speech-3-211"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20060927.17.3-211"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Yes, I ended up voting in favour of this report on the accession of Turkey.
I did so with a heavy heart, or something approaching it. We have confirmed the vote that took place within the Committee on Foreign Affairs on many points: we regret the slowing down of the reforms and highlight the persistent violations in relation to freedom of expression, religious freedom, minority rights, women’s rights and even cultural rights. We are very clear as regards the Cyprus question.
We maintain above all that, if accession is the aim of the negotiations, then it will in no circumstances be automatic. That is why I voted in favour of the amendments to the rapporteur’s text.
Why, then, do I have this huge regret? Because of the issue of the Armenian genocide, whereby Parliament has blatantly gone back on what it voted for previously. By yielding to the pressure of the Socialist Group in the European Parliament and others, plenary has just taken a step backwards: we are no longer calling on Turkey to recognise the Armenian genocide as a prerequisite for accession. This is an unacceptable U-turn that sends out what is, in my view, a disastrous signal to the negotiators: Parliament is eating its words, losing its memory and, even more seriously, losing sight of its duty to remember."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples