Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2010-09-20-Speech-1-081"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2010-09-20"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Agreement between the EC and Pakistan on readmission - Community readmission agreements with third countries (debate)2
dcterms:Language	"de"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20100920.18.1-081"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2010-09-20-Speech-1-0822
lpv:speaker	lp:Manfred Weber2
lpv:spokenAs	vice-chair; EPP (2009-07-14--2014-06-30)3 member; LIBE (2009-07-16--2012-01-18)3 member; Delegation for relations with India (2009-09-16--2014-06-30)3 substitute; REGI (2009-07-16--2012-01-18)3 substitute; DROI (2009-07-16--2012-01-18)3 substitute; Delegation for relations with the countries of the Andean Community (2009-09-16--2013-03-20)3 unknown; Christlich-Soziale Union in Bayern e.V. (2009-07-14--2014-06-30)3
lpv:translated text	"Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, firstly, on the subject of Pakistan: we are debating this at a difficult time for Pakistan, and all of us, I believe, support complete solidarity with the people there who have suffered this disaster. Mr Sógor has already talked specifically about the agreement. Therefore, I would like to make a few comments on the questions relating to European Union readmission agreements with third countries in general. Firstly, these agreements make sense and they are necessary, because we have legislation in Europe that governs immigration. However, if we have legislation that governs immigration then there will also be people who are residing here illegally. It then follows logically that we also need to have repatriation. With regard to many of the principles I have just stated, the Left – the Socialists – are often on our side, but when it comes to specific decisions regarding the actual conclusion of such an agreement, they then refuse to give their consent. I therefore believe that, despite this, we need to remain consistent. Secondly, standard human rights must be respected. The alternative to such an agreement is not, of course, that we have better human rights standards. Anyone who rejects this agreement accepts the fact that we will have 27 different legal standards in the European Union which are not monitored as closely as would be the case at European level. The third, and for me the most important, question is: how can we actually make partnership with third countries attractive in future? I would ask the Commission to work in a more interconnected way in future. If we open up European markets in the world trade negotiations, the third countries must also give us the opportunity to talk about repatriation or, with regard to the question of legal immigration, third countries must be in a position to grant us concessions in connection with repatriation. In other words, a more interconnected way of working is important here."@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