Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-05-31-Speech-4-089"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20010531.3.4-089"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
The outcome of the Intergovernmental Conference in Nice falls well short of what the people and the nations of Europe were expecting.
First of all, priority should have been given to the content of the European Union and primarily to the question of fulfilling the needs and the rights of all citizens. There should have been a debate about a real charter of social rights and freedoms, rather than about ratifying a cut-price charter of fundamental freedoms. Once the question of content had been raised, the next question to be tackled should have been the question of the equitable funding of European policies, in particular a review of taxation and a demand for democratic management mechanisms that would satisfy those needs. Taxes on capital (Tobin-type taxes) and sanctions on companies that make staff redundant while they are making profits would have been a step in the right direction.
We now come to the question of the container. Europe must equip itself with the means to ensure genuine democracy with reference to all the major issues at stake in our society, while respecting the diversity of the peoples of Europe, yet at the same time allowing the emergence of a European citizenship. We must give our workers and our citizens the means of joining in the debate, and influencing issues concerning employment rights and economic choices, placing the governments and the European Central Bank under control. The Treaty of Nice is diametrically opposed to this approach, as are the policies proposed by this report. This is why I have voted against."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples