Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-06-13-Speech-3-023"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2001-06-13"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Preparation for European Council (Göteborg 15/16 June 2001)2
dcterms:Language	"sv"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20010613.1.3-023"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2001-06-13-Speech-3-0242
lpv:speaker	lp:Jonas Sjöstedt2
lpv:spokenAs	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) (1999-09-14--2002-01-14)3 unknown; Vänsterpartiet (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 member; Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 member; EUL/NGL (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 substitute; Delegation to the European Economic Area Joint Parliamentary Committee (EEA) (1999-09-29--2002-01-14)3 substitute; AFCO (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, I would like to start by congratulating the Irish people on the result of the referendum on the Treaty of Nice. One country in the EU has allowed its people to vote on the Treaty of Nice and they said no. If more countries had been allowed to vote, the result would probably have been no in a number of countries, not least in Sweden. The European Council in Gothenburg must make it clear that Ireland’s rejection will be respected. This means that the Treaty of Nice has failed. It is a case of the EU having to follow its own rules. The right of Member States to say no to Treaty amendments is key to the fabric of the EU. Without it, the national democracies lose control of the Union. This is why it is unbelievable that the Swedish government can say that the Treaty of Nice still stands. By doing so, it is ignoring the democratic rules. If the Swedish parliament had voted no to a Treaty amendment, would we not want that to be respected by the other EU countries? I think that is a question which the Swedish Minister for Foreign Affairs should answer. The people of Ireland voted no to the Treaty of Nice. That is a no to increased supranationality, more power to the larger EU countries, a no to new steps towards a European State and EU militarisation. As such, it was also a vote for a better and more democratic Europe. Ireland’s no was not, however, a no to EU enlargement. Enlarging the EU will work perfectly well based on the Treaty of Amsterdam. The influence of the new Member States in the institutions can be regulated in the Accession Treaties as was the case during the last enlargement. Such a model can correct the discrimination which certain applicant countries experienced in Nice. If Ireland’s no is not respected, the message sent out will be clear, namely that the will of small countries is irrelevant and referendums are only respected if the result suits the power elite. It would be a serious matter if this were to happen. I would also like to say a few words about the strategy for sustainable development which is to be discussed at the Gothenburg Summit. The Commission’s proposal was unexpectedly concrete and good, not least considering its weak proposal for an Environmental Action Programme earlier this year. The proposal contains a number of clear goals such as a continued reduction in greenhouse gas emissions, measures to preserve biodiversity, requirements to stop increases in traffic and abolishing harmful subsidies, for example for tobacco cultivation. The risk now is clearly that the concrete elements of the strategy disappear during negotiations, while the rhetoric committing to nothing remains. A compromise proposal is already being circulated, a non-paper from the Swedish government which looks exactly as I described. I hope that the Swedish government will fight for and succeed in retaining the concrete content of the strategy."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph