Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2009-04-01-Speech-3-099"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2009-04-01"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Equal treatment of persons irrespective of religion or belief, disability, age or sexual orientation (debate)2
dcterms:Language	"nl"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20090401.14.3-099"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2009-04-01-Speech-3-1002
lpv:speaker	lp:Frank Vanhecke2
lpv:spokenAs	member; Delegation for relations with Switzerland, Iceland and Norway and to the European Economic Area (EEA) Joint Parliamentary Committee (2004-09-15--2009-07-13)3 unknown; Vlaams Belang (2004-11-15--2009-07-13)3 substitute; Delegation for relations with Iran (2007-03-15--2009-07-13)3 member; NA (2007-11-14--2009-07-13)3 member; PETI (2007-01-31--2009-07-13)3 substitute; EMPL (2007-01-31--2009-07-13)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, reports on anti-discrimination directives always bring out the worst in this House; this is particularly regrettable, as they often contain a great deal of good proposals and ideas for helping people with disabilities, for example. This does not change anything in substance, however. The amendment by Mr Weber, Amendment 81, does indeed state all the essentials; this Commission proposal is not a good one. It has to go, not only because it entails far too much red tape, but also, in particular, because it essentially infringes the principle of subsidiarity. Unfortunately, we all know that this amendment does not stand a chance, as this House never loses an opportunity to show its most politically correct side and always opts for more bureaucracy and more decision-making over the heads of European citizens. Aside from this, aside from the infringement of the principle of subsidiarity, this report also contains numerous proposals that run directly counter to elementary democratic principles and principles of the rule of law. One example is Amendment 54. While the whole report makes a big hoo-ha about not discriminating against people, this amendment advocates discrimination on grounds of non-politically correct beliefs – but then, at the end of the day, this is what a great many other aspects of this report set out to do. Hidden in a catalogue of worthy principles and pseudo-good intentions lurks the judicialisation of political correctness. It is not about anti-discrimination measures, then, but very often about genuine muzzling laws to undermine freedom of expression yet more, and strengthen a kind of progressive opinion terrorism still further. The essential question is and remains: what on earth has this got to do with Europe? Leave to Member States what is theirs, for heaven’s sake."@en1
lpv:videoURI	<go to Events_and_structure europarl>2

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph