Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-05-30-Speech-3-087"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2001-05-30"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Treaty of Nice and the future of the EU2
dcterms:Language	"nl"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20010530.5.3-087"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2001-05-30-Speech-3-0882
lpv:speaker	lp:Bas Belder2
lpv:spokenAs	member; EDD (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 unknown; Staatkundig Gereformeerde Partij - Gereformeerd Politiek Verbond - Reformatorisch Politieke Federatie (1999-07-20--2002-03-17)3 member; Temporary committee on the Echelon interception system (2000-07-06--2001-09-05)3 member; Members from the European Parliament to the Joint Parliamentary Assembly of the Agreement between the African, Caribbean and Pacific States and the European Union (ACP-EU) (2000-10-05--2002-01-14)3 member; Committee on Foreign Affairs, Human Rights, Common Security and Defence Policy (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 vice-chair; Delegation for relations with the United States (1999-07-22--2002-01-14)3 substitute; Committee on Industry, External Trade, Research and Energy (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, allow me, by way of parallel process, to give you a brief, historical account. In the seventeenth century, the Netherlands consisted of seven provinces which were each independent and sovereign. Only certain matters were regulated by a common authority. How did they deal with decision-making in those days? Every province used to have veto right in all decisions. Furthermore, the representatives were not authorised to render decisions binding upon their provinces. That was only possible following approval from the province. You can imagine that in an era of coaches, tow barges and carrier pigeons, this caused quite a bit of delay. Despite this, the Netherlands was in those days a prosperous world power and had, relatively speaking, a great deal of freedom. The complex political system evidently did not cause any obstacles. Many in this Parliament do not spell a bright future for Europe. The European Union is said to head for a deadlock, unless more far-reaching and in-depth centralisation takes place. I would call that into question. Decision-making will mainly depend on consensus among governments. The past has shown that this can also be reached unanimously. More important, however, is the EU’s future stability. That will depend largely on the extent to which its decisions are experienced as being legitimate. The EU’s legitimacy is a far greater problem than its complex political structure. However, the legitimacy of decision-making cannot be enhanced by centralisation. It is distressing to see a lack of attention for this point in the Méndez de Vigo/Seguro report. That is why I shall be voting against it."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph