Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-03-14-Speech-3-019"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2001-03-14"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Follow-up to Nice2
dcterms:Language	"fr"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20010314.1.3-019"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2001-03-14-Speech-3-0202
lpv:speaker	lp:Olivier Dupuis2
lpv:spokenAs	substitute; Delegation to the EU-Romania Joint Parliamentary Committee (2000-01-17--2002-01-14)3 member; PETI (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 member; Delegation for relations with the countries of South Asia and the South Asia Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) (1999-09-29--2002-01-14)3 member; AFCO (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 substitute; Committee on Foreign Affairs, Human Rights, Common Security and Defence Policy (1999-07-22--2002-01-14)3 member; Delegations to the parliamentary cooperation committees for relations with Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia (1999-09-29--2002-01-14)3 unknown; Lista Emma Bonino (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 member; TGI (1999-07-20--2001-10-02)3
lpv:translated text	"Madam President, Madam President-in-Office of the Council, President of the Commission, Mr Barnier, ladies and gentlemen, a fundamental point seems to have been recognised at last by Parliament. There were very good reasons to look ahead to the next conference. I am very pleased to see that this Parliament has remembered that there will in fact be elections in 2004, that it was not elected in perpetuity, and that there was a certain amount of interference between Parliament and the appointments that had been proposed to us. Basically, we can only say that there is still not much meat in the pot, as the Italians say, and that we are talking about the gender of angels, that is, the role and the links between the national parliaments and the European Parliament. This is a subject which, like the Loch Ness monster, keeps rearing its head in our debates but has never got us very far. The people of Europe are not very interested in this kind of debate. They would rather know who does what at European and at national level. They would like a bit less Baroque construction and a bit more clarity. They would like the European Parliament to have a bit more influence over matters which concern them rather than over matters which do not concern them. They would like national parliaments to have a bit more visibility and a bit more influence over issues which should clearly be left to national parliaments. The people of Europe would also perhaps like to be able to elect the President of the Commission, for example, so that they know who is responsible for making the major choices, and for the major issues which must be decided at European level. My view is that we must not think civil society is always lagging behind in the debates we are able to have here within the European Parliament. Unfortunately, the contrary is often the case and our Parliament should perhaps travel somewhat more amongst the people of Europe to equip itself with new ideas. I would finally like to address a question to the President-in-Office, to the President of the Commission and, above all, to the Chairman of the Group of the European People’s Party and European Democrats, my friend, Mr Poettering. I hear that the Belgian Minister, Mr Renders, a Liberal, is proposing to create a new Baroque figure, a ‘Mr Euro’ on the model of Mr CFSP, which was disputed not only by us but also, I believe, very forcefully by Mr Poettering and by the Group of the European People’s Party. Is Mr Poettering in favour of the creation of this slightly Baroque figure of a ‘Mr Euro’ on the model of Mr CFSP, as I believe I heard him say in his conclusion of the European People’s Party Congress in Berlin? I would be very grateful for an answer to this question."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph