Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2008-10-09-Speech-4-240"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2008-10-09"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Explanations of vote2
dcterms:Language	"pt"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20081009.25.4-240"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2008-10-09-Speech-4-2412
lpv:speaker	lp:Pedro Guerreiro2
lpv:spokenAs	substitute; TRAN (2007-01-31--2009-07-13)3 member; EUL/NGL (2005-01-13--2009-07-13)3 unknown; Partido Comunista Português (2005-01-13--2009-07-13)3 vice-chair; PECH (2007-01-31--2009-07-13)3 member; Delegation to the EU-Mexico Joint Parliamentary Committee (2005-03-08--2009-07-13)3 substitute; Delegation to the ACP-EU Joint Parliamentary Assembly (2005-01-18--2009-07-13)3 member; REGI (2007-01-31--2009-07-13)3
lpv:translated text	". − With the adoption of this report – by 503 votes in favour to 96 votes against, with 15 abstentions – the majority of this House has once again demonstrated its profound disregard for the democracy and sovereignty of the people. This is an attempt to impose the so-called ‘symbols of the Union’, in this case by incorporating them in the Rules of Procedure of this Parliament, which will stipulate that ‘the flag shall be flown at all Parliament premises and on the occasion of official events’, that it ‘shall be used in each meeting room of the Parliament’, that ‘the anthem shall be performed at the opening of each constitutive session and at other solemn sittings’ and that ‘the motto [United in Diversity] shall be reproduced on Parliament’s official documents’. Reference is made to ‘the importance of symbols for reconnecting the citizens with the European Union and for building a European identity which is complementary to the national identities of the Member States’. Does this ‘reconnection’ involve disregarding and trying to bypass the democratic and sovereignly expressed will of the people who rejected the first proposal for the ‘Constitutional’ Treaty and then the ‘Lisbon’ Treaty? What hypocrisy... Does this ‘reconnection’ involve imposing these ‘symbols of the Union’ when the Union does not legally exist and after these symbols have been removed from the text of the proposed Treaty? What cynicism... In essence this is simply another manoeuvre to try and once again resuscitate the rejected and doubly defunct proposed Treaty."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph