Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-09-03-Speech-3-047"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2003-09-03"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Debate on the European Convention (continuation)2
dcterms:Language	"fr"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20030903.4.3-047"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2003-09-03-Speech-3-0482
lpv:speaker	lp:Georges Berthu2
lpv:spokenAs	substitute; Delegation to the European Economic Area Joint Parliamentary Committee (EEA) (2002-02-07--2004-07-19)3 substitute; ECON (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3 member; NA (2001-01-31--2004-07-19)3 unknown; Mouvement pour la France (2000-11-23--2004-07-19)3 member; AFCO (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3 member; Delegation for relations with Canada (2002-02-07--2004-07-19)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President of the Convention, you once asked the Convention a question that was simultaneously pertinent and impertinent and to which we have never had a reply. When the working party’s report on legal personality was presented, you asked: ‘To what exactly would you accord legal personality? To a state or to an international organisation?’ It was an excellent question, but an inconvenient one. The Convention never replied, preferring not to commit itself. If, however, it was possible to say at the start that European integration had a character all of its own and that it was a question of a non-identified legal object, the object would now appear more and more easily identifiable as the treaties have come and gone and, above all, at the conclusion of the Convention. In essence, it takes the form of a state, of a central and supranational decision-making power with its unique institutional framework, its law superseding the national constitutions, its common law majority decision-making procedure and even, now, its Constitution with its constitutional super-court. Perhaps a number of these elements – in certain lights and considered in isolation – may suggest an international organisation. They all obviously combine, however, to form the outline of a European state, given the strength, intensity and broad sweep with which they are being applied. I should also like, in my turn, to ask you a question: do you think that this European superstate really is what our peoples want? You who quoted surveys to us just now should know that the answer is ‘no’. Our peoples certainly want to see European cooperation. They even want to see more policies with cross-border implications dealt with at European level. At the same time, however, they want their countries to retain their freedom to take decisions and the freedom to choose their national democracy, the only form of democracy in the full sense of the word to date. In these conditions, do you not think that the European superstate is a very poor response to a good question?"@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph