Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-07-03-Speech-1-074"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20000703.6.1-074"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Mr President, firstly I would like to add my voice to those who earlier paid their respects to the memory of President Pflimlin. One of his lasting legacies is an understanding of the continuing need of the strength of the three political institutions of the EU and for mutual respect between them.
It is perhaps inevitable as we are discussing the ending of the Portuguese Presidency that, with the recent speeches in Berlin, the memory is going to focus more on the second half of the IGC than the first, but I would like at this stage to record my thanks to the Portuguese Presidency for their assiduousness in consulting the Parliament both here in the plenary and in the Constitutional Affairs Committee.
The Berlin speeches by Foreign Minister Fischer, visionary and controversial, by President Chirac, controversial but not visionary, and by Prime Minister Blair, neither visionary nor controversial, which threaten to overshadow the memory of the Portuguese Presidency, leave certain questions in the mind which the Portuguese Presidency can still help us with.
Firstly I understand that Prime Minister Jospin has said that he would rather see no agreement in December in Nice than an unsatisfactory institutional reform. Could the Portuguese Presidency confirm that sufficient work has been done to ensure that agreement can be reached in December?
Secondly, on enlargement, could he confirm that there is still the political will in the Council so that candidate countries, this House and the public of Europe can expect to hear target dates announced for the first wave of accession? This is something that the Commission and many in this House would like to see.
My last question on close cooperation would include Commissioner Patten, if he is able to demonstrate that he has not imposed a vow of silence. Is it the case that the Council still attaches importance to the democratic interplay between the three institutions and that closer cooperation will not inevitably mean greater decision making by one institution, by the Council, to the detriment of Parliament and Commission and, by implication, the people of Europe?"@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples