Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-12-12-Speech-2-105"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2000-12-12"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:European Council/ French Presidency (continuation)2
dcterms:Language	"it"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20001212.6.2-105"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2000-12-12-Speech-2-1062
lpv:speaker	lp:Monica Frassoni2
lpv:spokenAs	member; Delegation to the EU-Cyprus Joint Parliamentary Committee (1999-09-28--2002-01-14)3 member; G/EFA (1999-07-20--2002-01-07)3 substitute; Delegation to the EU-Turkey Joint Parliamentary Committee (1999-12-16--2002-01-14)3 substitute; Committee on Foreign Affairs, Human Rights, Common Security and Defence Policy (1999-07-22--2002-01-14)3 member; AFCO (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 unknown; Ecolo (Belgium) (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, President Chirac has played down the negative reactions of many of the Members to the outcome of Nice, describing them as unrealistic and not pragmatic. In reality, it is the President who is being unrealistic if he thinks that it will be possible to enlarge the Union with such a Treaty. In my opinion, it is not more realistic to fight for one's own national prestige than to fight for the efficient functioning of the Union, and I would not say that huge numbers of European citizens came out to follow the naval battle fought by their leaders at Nice. My feeling is that the French Presidency's most serious error was to run the debate along the lines of a battle of powers between States – a mean, shameless fight over details – rather than as a relevant debate on the Union's policies. Terrified of jeopardising France's equal voting rights with Germany, the Presidency docilely allowed its proposals to extend qualified majority voting to 40 or so subjects to be knocked down to less than half this number. Yet even the pro-Europe- States did little to fight for its cause and, in the end, bowed before a disappointing compromise. As for the European Parliament, only the Commission defended its legitimacy and I therefore thank President Prodi and Commissioner Barnier for this, but they were alone in their endeavours and this was reflected in the final compromise. We truly hope this will be the last Intergovernmental Conference, considering that the Summit revealed a breakdown in Community solidarity. The real winners in this Conference were Blair and Aznar, the Euro-sceptics. It is their Europe, the Europe of the market and the right to veto which has won the battle. Our Europe, the Europe of democracy and a sustainable future, lost. There is one small ray of light although even that was mortgaged to the hilt by the French Presidency, and that is what is known as the post-Nice process. However, there are ambiguities which require urgent clarification. First of all, 2004 is too far away: we need to act sooner than that. We want a democratic process with the objective of a European Constitution to be defined by June and launched at the end of the year: the Charter took 8 months to draw up so a Constitution can be produced in less than 4 years. This is our next battle. I hope that, this time, the governments will fight with us rather than on the opposing side."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph