Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2010-03-09-Speech-2-199"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2010-03-09"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Explanations of vote2
dcterms:Language	"fr"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20100309.18.2-199"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2010-03-09-Speech-2-9592
lpv:speaker	lp:Bruno Gollnisch2
lpv:spokenAs	unknown; Front national (2009-07-14--2014-06-30)3 member; NA (2009-07-14--2014-06-30)3 substitute; BUDG (2009-07-16--2012-01-18)3 member; Delegation for relations with Japan (2009-09-16--2014-06-30)3 member; TRAN (2009-07-16--2012-01-18)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, we voted against Mr Coelho’s report. Indeed, to allow holders of a long-stay visa, that is to say, one lasting more than six months, to benefit automatically from freedom of movement throughout all the States of the Schengen area, as though they were holders of a residence permit, is irresponsible. Your examples are misleading. It does not matter whether we are talking about students wishing to visit the capitals of Europe (with the exception of London, Dublin and Copenhagen, which are outside the Schengen area), researchers whose research is due to last less than a year, or expatriates without the appropriate residence and work permits – it is all of marginal importance and merely a pretext. In point of fact, this measure is yet another negation of the sovereign right of States to decide who may or may not, under which conditions and for how long, enter their territory. By standardising rights, it ultimately makes long-stay visas completely meaningless, for the sake of promoting a sort of automatic resident’s status, one that is granted from the moment a person wishes to come to Europe for more than three months and for a purpose other than that of tourism. This is unacceptable."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph