Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/1999-10-27-Speech-3-056"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.19991027.2.3-056"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, let me first of all say a word of thanks on behalf of the Group of the European People’s Party and European Democrats to Jean-Luc Dehaene, Richard von Weizsäcker and Lord Simon for this report which is ambitious, courageous and yet, at the same time, realistic. That is why this report points to the future. We had a debate with Jean-Luc Dehaene in our Group last week. – Commissioner Michel Barnier was present – and I should like to tell you, Commissioner, that we have every confidence that you will make your contribution towards taking the European Union, aided by the work of the Commission, into a worthwhile future. You have the support of all of us on this road.
In Helsinki it will be decided that we should negotiate with six further States about accession to the European Union. We are therefore negotiating with 12 States in all, and it is very probable that, in a first round, more than five States will accede to the European Union. It is not therefore realistic to limit this Amsterdam Protocol to three subjects. We must go beyond that. As the Group of the European People’s Party, the Christian Democrats and the European Democrats, we therefore say: we want more than was promised in Amsterdam; we want Amsterdam plus; we want a fundamental reform of the European Union so that it is capable of the expansion which is a great priority for us.
The heart of the matter is certainly majority voting in the Council, and we are in favour of this becoming the basic decision-making procedure. In all questions of majority voting, moreover, the European Parliament must have equal rights under legislation to participate in decision-making, as it already has now in the case of agricultural policy (which is a further point). Where the matter must still be discussed, we appreciate that each country is also represented on the Commission and that we are getting a new weighting in the Council of Ministers. The double majority is one instrument, and there are others. However, the way in which the votes that can be cast in the Council of Ministers are recalculated must still, of course, be democratic in character. I would also say that there is a dimension beyond all legal procedures. Whenever, now, representatives of a number of large Member States show a certain presumption, a certain arrogance towards smaller Member States, we reject this and say that all Member States of the European Union make their contribution and must be integrated into the Union. On this issue, the large Member States too ought to acknowledge that the Presidencies of many a small country have proved to be more successful, more efficient and more committed than those of many large Member States.
We approve of the proposal of the Committee of Wise Men to create a basic Treaty. I am particularly glad that our friend Jacques Santer was pleased about this point because his country, Luxembourg, is an example of an efficient smaller Member State. We emphasise that it is quite right – and I think this is a brilliant idea – for the working party to have proposed creating a basic Treaty and a Treaty for the enlarged Union. Under the basic Treaty, all Member States and all Member Parliaments would always be represented when a reform was proposed. That is only right. Under the Treaty for the enlarged Union, it would be the Council of Ministers and the European Parliament which could take the relevant decision This makes for flexibility, and the possibility would exist of doing justice to the respective requirements of the countries concerned.
Mr Barnier spoke of the legal personality of the European Union. Legally, the European Union is at present a non-entity, a nothing; it cannot even buy a house, let alone be represented in an international organisation. This is something we must change if the European Union is to carry any weight in the world.
We must also take action in the field of foreign, security and defence policy. Just last week, the Institute for Strategic Studies in London said that Europeans were not in a position to act. That is not only a question for the European Union as an institution, but a question of the readiness of the Member States to provide our armed forces with the necessary logistical support and reconnaissance. We expect the new High Representative, Mr Solana, to arrange with Chris Patten for the necessary initiatives to be taken here. We also now need a large-scale debate about the geographical enlargement of the European Union, about what it is to contain, and we urge the Council of Ministers, which is to say the ladies and gentlemen who are represented there, to have the courage to lead Europe into a worthwhile future, for we are concerned here with stability, peace and democracy on our continent in the 21st century."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples