Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2009-11-24-Speech-2-295"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20091124.32.2-295"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, we in the Group of the Greens/European Free Alliance are already very much asking ourselves how it can be that we are deciding here about a resolution on a programme that is already out of date? Only yesterday, the Swedish Presidency tabled a new and highly amended proposal for the Stockholm Programme. I would assume that the vast majority of Members of this esteemed Chamber have not had the opportunity to read the proposal in question. In my opinion, that is an unacceptable situation for this highly sensitive matter.
What is more, the procedure within Parliament that led to this resolution was largely opaque and, at times, chaotic. The smaller groups were excluded from the process of drawing up the resolution as far as possible, and the abundance of amendments to the procedures of the joint committees posed significant obstacles to democratic decision making. Please make allowance, then, for our requests for a whole series of split votes. Parliament seriously needs to consider how it wants to deal with these conditions, both in respect of the Council and of its own Members.
I will turn now to the content of the Stockholm Programme. Parts of this work programme are undoubtedly to be viewed as progress. When it comes to justice and the common construction of civil law rules, we Greens, too, see positive beginnings for the coming years. However, when it comes to the relationship of the citizens to the State, the programme is a manifestation of an utterly badly erected framework. In relation to migration and asylum policy, civil rights and data protection, the need for security in Europe has been prioritised ahead of human rights and freedom. It is being openly suggested that more freedom in Europe would automatically lead to less security.
I ask you, what happened to the founding myth of the European idea, in this case? Fear is being stoked here, and not – as it says in the programme – justified fear of organised crime or terrorism, but fear of our fellow human beings here in Europe, fear of those who want to come to Europe and, above all, fear of anything that we think in some way foreign.
The Stockholm Programme, and regrettably also the proposed resolution, continue the linking of internal and foreign policy in order to facilitate the monitoring of everyone in Europe and the depriving of the people on our external borders of their rights, which is to be enforced by Frontex. Europe must finally leave this trend behind it and put the wrong moves of recent years under the microscope.
That also means consciously standing up and advocating what you believe in. This applies, for example, to our debates about the SWIFT agreement. Why are we once more giving way to US policy when it comes to security policy matters – as in the case of the SWIFT agreement – without reason, and without having a comprehensive debate on the matter in this House once again. Why do we, Parliament, allow the Council to run rings around us time and again? We, Parliament, very much need to do something about that. Send out a message here and now in favour of human rights and in favour of freedom – including to your governments – and vote in favour of all our amendments. We Greens cannot vote ‘yes’ to the resolution as it stands."@en1
|
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples