Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2008-01-17-Speech-4-104"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20080117.15.4-104"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Mr President, I am glad to have this opportunity to make an explanation of vote. I put in for speaking time in the debate on this issue, but one of the consequences of my party’s unhappy
with the European People’s Party is that British Conservatives are systematically denied speaking time in important debates.
What I wanted to say was that this report is based on a conceptual misunderstanding. People say that, because we have cross-border crimes, and because crime is international, we need cross-border policing.
We already have it. The police forces of the nation states have for decades been collaborating to great effect. We have Interpol, we have the Hague Convention, we have extradition treaties, we recognise the time spent in another country’s prison as constituting part of a sentence, and so on.
The difference is that these things are based on democratic decisions between independent states, whereas what is being proposed with EUROPOL is the federalisation of what ought to be a sensitive national issue – namely the policing of criminal law.
If we want to do that, we should first ask people in a referendum, which is why we need a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
"mésalliance"1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples