Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2008-10-20-Speech-1-116"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20081020.14.1-116"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, I should like to thank all the speakers. I wish to make it clear once more that we have further reinforced the provisions which the Commission has proposed and which are already laid down in Rome III, by stating quite clearly the following, for example, in Amendment 25: Should the law indicated […] not recognise legal separation or divorce or do so in a form that is discriminatory as regards one of the spouses, the
shall apply.
This means that, in such cases, in Sweden, for example, the jurisdiction is located in Sweden. We have stated quite clearly that, if such cases should arise, there is a clear answer. Indeed, this could not possibly be laid down any more clearly in a text – which is why I do not understand what the problem is. However, we should endeavour to understand what it is – and I am obliged to Mr Barrot for expressing his views so clearly and for his willingness to speak to our fellow politicians in Sweden once again – as I am still at a loss.
After all, this regulation is intended to further improve all the existing provisions. Finding a positive answer is very important to me as a woman who has always played a role in shaping women’s policy, as the weaker partner tends to be the woman. We must pay particular attention to ensuring that a good position is established.
I also hope that, in the spirit of the compromise for which we have been striving time and again – I am much obliged to Mr Demetriou in this regard – we shall yet succeed in convincing Mr Casini that we have a good position on this. A basis for this is also found in Amendment 38, where we make clear once more – even though this is already stated in the text – that, naturally, only law that is really in keeping with the principles of the European Union and of the Charter of Fundamental Rights should be applied in the Member States, as that goes without saying as far as we are concerned. Anything else would be out of the question; no court in the Union would apply in any way law that was not. I find this utterly inconceivable – which is made clear, of course."@en1
|
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples