Romania trebuie sa ceara in UE renuntarea la denumirea "romani" 
pentru "gipsy"
   
   
  Denumirea de "romani" pentru romi este o denumire introdusa recent, si care 
printr-o cerere oficiala a Romaniei si lobby, trebuie sa fie schimbata.
   
  Avem o abundenta de articole si daca se da search pe internet se observa o 
mare confuzie. Daca se cauta denumirea "romani" pe Google se observa ca se 
refera la limba romilor, dar de asemnea in Engleza rom este scris "romani".
   
  La fel cum scriem noi cetatenii Romaniei: "romani".
   
  Romania trebuie sa ceara de urgenta, avand in vedere momentul creat in 
Italia, sa se renunte in toate documentele oficiale ale UE a denumirii "romani" 
pentru romi sau a denumirii "romani" pentru limba romilor. Se poate gasi o alta 
denumire, desigur. Nu trebuie sa se foloseasca gipsy sau gitanes sau tiganes 
daca romii nu vor asta, dar se poate gasi ceva care sa delimiteze clar poporul 
roman de nationalitatea romilor. Nu se pot denumi romii "romani" iar noi sa ne 
spunem la fel "romani". Nu se poate ca limba "romana" si limba "romani" sa fie 
confundate datorita asemanarii izbitoare.
   
  Iata un articol mai jos din care am extras doua paragrafe care arata 
folosirea "romani":
   
  The recent arrest of an ethnic Romani man from Romania for a brutal murder 
sparked an outcry in Italy against his fellow countrymen. 
   
  The real state of play regarding immigration and the labor market has 
unfortunately been overlooked amid all the news of Polish invasions and 
Romanian (read Gypsy) hordes. 
  


 
    
http://www.tol.cz/look/TOL/article.tpl?IdLanguage=1&IdPublication=4&NrIssue=247&NrSection=2&NrArticle=19231
   
  Open Borders, Closed Minds 
by TOL
7 December 2007
   
  Movement from poor to rich EU countries is a far smaller problem than the 
union's muddled migration policies. 
   
  Freedom abounds in the European Union. Well, in print at least: the word 
appears nearly three dozen times in the European Union Treaty and the European 
Community Treaty. 

EU law-writers are masters of obfuscation, but at times they can express 
themselves with admirable precision. The first paragraph of Article 39 of the 
Community Treaty, for instance, concisely states, "Freedom of movement for 
workers shall be secured within the Community." 

All EU citizens are meant to enjoy freedom of movement in the bloc. So how is 
it that entire populations of former communist states are still denied the 
freedom to work wherever they please?

The "four freedoms" of movement of goods, services, labor, and capital rest on 
a fundamental principle of EU law: No member state may discriminate against the 
citizens of another on grounds of nationality. 

So on what grounds did Italy recently deport a couple of hundred EU citizens, 
nearly all of them Romanians?

The recent arrest of an ethnic Romani man from Romania for a brutal murder 
sparked an outcry in Italy against his fellow countrymen. Italian authorities 
defended the deportations, saying Romanians committed a disproportionate number 
of crimes. EU Justice Commissioner Franco Frattini supported his country's 
move, pointing out that the legislation on freedom of movement allows the 
principle to be waived if necessary to protect public order and public 
security. He was rebuked in a European Parliament resolution, and by individual 
deputies, for breaking with the practice of EU commissioners not to get 
involved in their home country's domestic matters, Hungary's Viktoria Mohacsi, 
herself of Romani origin, asked if the justice commissioner's role was not "to 
ensure that discriminatory measures are forbidden and make concrete proposals 
to [encourage] member states to develop integration strategies?" 

One Italian politician and staunch advocate of EU enlargement made a more 
subtle criticism. Prime Minister Romano Prodi, an energetic former European 
Commission president, suggested the union should move toward a common policy on 
dealing with individual migrants rather than interfere with the fundamental 
principle of free movement. 

IMMIGRATION NOT THE PROBLEM

When "old" EU members were justifying their erection of barriers against 
workers from most of the countries that entered the union in 2004 and 2007, 
they did not argue for an infringement of free movement, although that is 
exactly what they intended. 

Rather, they fell back on the economic effect the arrival of large numbers of 
new workers might have, although EU legislation does not anticipate any such 
line of argument. Vienna blamed pessimistic economic forecasts. Berlin and 
Brussels mentioned high unemployment. Paris enacted a gradual lifting of 
restrictions, starting with low-paid sectors where workers were most needed. 

The real state of play regarding immigration and the labor market has 
unfortunately been overlooked amid all the news of Polish invasions and 
Romanian (read Gypsy) hordes. It may come as a surprise to many Britons and 
Italians to learn that labor migration from the new to the old member states is 
comparatively insignificant compared to migration among the rich members or to 
migration from outside the union. 

As the European Commission noted last year, the effect of increased westward 
movements of workers from the post-2004 member states has been "rather limited."

Eurostat data indicate that in 2005 and 2006, citizens of the new EU states 
made up only 0.4 percent of the working-age population of the old members. In 
contrast, workers from other old EU countries made up about 2 percent of the 
EU-15 working-age population.

In truth, much of the pain due to labor migration from new to old members can 
be traced back to the EU's inability to reach consensus on migration policy, 
and beyond that to deep ideological rifts within the most prosperous free-trade 
zone ever devised. 

One step toward putting the question of westward migration within the EU on a 
more rational footing would be to acknowledge that it is not about massive 
population shifts.

Naturally, the media have focused on the countries where there has been a large 
influx of Eastern European workers – mainly Britain and Ireland. But there have 
been few complaints about these "hordes" taking jobs from locals, and the 
newcomers have not slowed the vigorous migration of workers from the older EU 
countries. 

TIME FOR REAL REFORM

Behind the talk of long-term migration, the aging workforce and making Europe 
more competitive lurk the same dilemmas that have stalked the EU's back 
corridors since the bloc's inception, becoming acute with the Maastricht 
Treaty's announcement of "an ever-closer union" of economic and political 
partners; the death of Maastricht's prodigal child, the European Constitution 
project; and the constitution's rebirth as the wishy-washy "reform treaty" that 
will soon go to members for consideration. 

The dilemmas of balancing economic openness with national security or extending 
economic freedoms into the sphere of private life; and the agonizing over how 
much national sovereignty should be sacrificed for the sake of a more 
streamlined, richer, and perhaps more secure union make for clamorous arguments 
in the rich, western two-thirds of the EU but have relatively little impact on 
most people's lives. Citizens of the other third feel these questions in a much 
more tangible way, gallingly so when all they are trying to do is raise their 
living standards. 

"It's absurd to have 27 immigration policies in Europe," European Commission 
President Jose Manuel Barroso remarked over the Italy-Romania spat.

But that is what the EU does have. The version of the reform treaty now 
circulating would strip member states of the right to veto new immigration and 
asylum laws. That will be a very welcome novelty and could lead to a more 
humane way of incorporating newcomers into the bloc. Other innovations that 
could simplify EU decision making and inject much-needed transparency include 
cutting the size of the Commission and creating a permanent presidency to 
manage EU leaders' summits. But even if all 27 members ratify the treaty it 
will not come into full effect until 2017. The Commission and national leaders 
– not to mention Romania and Italy – need to act long before then on fairer 
migration policies. 
   
  Copyright © 2007 Transitions Online
   
  ----------------------------
 grupul [Cetateni], grup nemoderat
    
---------------------------------
    grupul [Cetateni], grup nemoderat -  Messages

                         

       
---------------------------------
Looking for a X-Mas gift?  Everybody needs a Flickr Pro Account!

Raspunde prin e-mail lui