Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2007-11-29-Speech-4-236"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20071129.41.4-236"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"It would seem that the European Parliament has approved (?) the ‘Charter of Fundamental Rights’ (CFR) for the second time, seven years on from the first.
We should note here that the CFR was drafted by a so-called ‘convention’, created for the purpose, which reached a consensus based on the lowest common denominator under pressure from forces advocating the most reactionary positions, namely the British Labour government, led by Tony Blair.
The outcome of this procedure is a CFR that is much weaker on social rights than, for example, the Constitution of the Portuguese Republic or the European Social Charter, which Portugal has ratified.
For example, the defence of the right to work clearly and explicitly enshrined in the Constitution of the Portuguese Republic (Article 58) and the European Social Charter (Article 1) is ‘adapted’ and ‘modernised’ in the CFR and becomes the ‘right to engage in work.’
There are other examples, as can be seen in the ‘explanations prepared under the authority of the Praesidium of the Convention which drafted the Charter and updated under the responsibility of the Praesidium of the European Convention’ that drafted the ‘European constitution’. These ‘explanations’ are fundamental for interpretation of the content of the CFR but almost never accompany it. I wonder why?"@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples