Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2009-04-01-Speech-3-118"
Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
---|---|
rdf:type | |
dcterms:Date | |
dcterms:Is Part Of | |
dcterms:Language | |
lpv:document identification number |
"en.20090401.14.3-118"2
|
lpv:hasSubsequent | |
lpv:speaker | |
lpv:spokenAs | |
lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, Mr Barrot, ladies and gentlemen, I, alongside my colleagues from the Group of the European People’s Party (Christian Democrats) and European Democrats, voted for this report in the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs. That is because of the excellent work by the shadow rapporteur, Mr Gauber, towards trying to find a balanced compromise. I would also congratulate the rapporteur, Mrs Buitenweg, on her work and join her in calling on everyone to avoid a radicalisation of positions and to seek the broadest possible consensus.
As in all compromises, there are points on which we successfully make our opinion prevail and others which we find harder to accept. We are talking about a compromise which has to take into account the legislation, accepted practice and various cultural traditions existing in the 27 Member States. I consider the 10-year period in which buildings can be adapted to enable disabled people to access goods, services and resources to be positive, as well as the fact that, where difficulties at the structural level that are impossible to overcome persist, it will always be possible to find alternatives.
I also add my voice to those expressing concerns in relation to insurance companies – the fact, for example, that they, as well as medical opinion, have been given consideration. I cannot, however, accept the idea of eliminating the reference – agreed on in committee – to the principle of subsidiarity in topics relating to the law on family, marriage and reproduction. These are exclusive competences of the Member States. The same applies to Article 8, which Amendment 90 of the Group of the European People’s Party (Christian Democrats) and European Democrats aims to remove because, given the existing legislative traditions in many Member States, it is not possible to accept the inversion of the burden of proof as that will cause insuperable legal problems.
If these key points are adopted in plenary session, I will be unable to vote for this report. I will never, however, be able with a clear conscience to vote against a directive that prohibits discrimination between people irrespective of their religion or belief, disability, age or sexual orientation. In conclusion, Mr President, it is also a case of defining which Europe we want to help build. I am fully in favour of a Europe that ceaselessly fights all forms of discrimination."@en1
|
lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples