Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2011-10-12-Speech-3-137-000"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2011-10-12"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Accession of Bulgaria and Romania to Schengen (debate)2
dcterms:Language	"hu"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20111012.15.3-137-000"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2011-10-12-Speech-3-138-0002
lpv:speaker	lp:Csanád Szegedi2
lpv:spokenAs	substitute; IMCO (2009-07-16--2012-01-18)3 unknown; Jobbik Magyarországért Mozgalom (2009-07-14--2014-06-30)3 member; Delegation for relations with the Arab Peninsula (2010-11-22--2014-06-30)3 member; NA (2009-07-14--2014-06-30)3 member; REGI (2009-07-16--2012-01-18)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, I am disappointed that we cannot draw a distinction between the case of Bulgaria and that of Romania, as it is only Romania’s accession to Schengen that I want to discuss. I am in two minds about Romania’s accession to the Schengen area. On the one hand, eliminating the existing national borders would be in the interests both of the Hungarian community in Transylvania and of Hungary itself. It would also mean the elimination of the unjust borders imposed upon Hungary under the Treaty of Trianon. At the same time, however, I also understand the Dutch and the Finns in the sense that we have to look at the crime statistics too. This is not hard to do; they are not talking about fiction, but about reality. And what the crime statistics show is that Romania is not yet ready to be part of Schengen. Also, joining Schengen represents an extension of a country’s legal framework. I cannot support Romania’s accession to the Schengen area until the issue of self-determination for the Szekler region or autonomy for Hungarians in the Érmellék (Ier River) area has been resolved."@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