Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-05-16-Speech-4-106"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20020516.4.4-106"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
We voted against the Lamassoure report for the reasons given in our replies to the Convention questionnaire on the Union's missions. This report takes no account whatsoever of the numerous amendments which we tabled but which were rejected by the federalist majority in committee.
Most importantly, we launched a specific appeal in our amendments in favour of a basic treaty which would recognise the prime role of the national democracies and draw logical conclusions for the Union's institutions, especially the need for proper control of subsidiarity. The members of the French parliament have outlined this basic treaty, which is available for public inspection at our secretariat.
Similarly, we called for the treaty to create an interparliamentary pillar, between the Community pillar and the intergovernmental pillar, under which European decisions would be taken by networked national parliaments. This pillar would have strict respect for national sovereignty and would be responsible for numerous national matters which require exchanges at European level, such as coordinating social legislation. It would also be the main forum for discussing all matters relating to the movement of people and immigration, some of which would be taken up by the Community pillar."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples