Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-09-24-Speech-3-034"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20030924.1.3-034"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, despite the highly polarised positions that were taken up, the Convention has produced a draft Constitution that possesses relative internal consistency. As a member of the Convention, I supported the outcome of the proceedings with its overall content in mind, although, like others, I was unable to assent to all the statements made.
What will come out of all this is, for the first time in the history of European integration, a European constitution establishing a framework within which many millions of people in over twenty-five states can live together; that is what is really significant. I see it as a positive thing that the EU as a whole will become more democratic, that progress has been made in the separation of the powers, that Parliament will be given more rights and that referendums will be introduced. It is also very important to me that the EU can become more social, although this presupposes that we stick to the goals and values set out in Part I. What that means is that, if we are to have the social mission, as incorporated in the Convention’s draft, the Intergovernmental Conference must resist the European Central Bank’s insistence that this provision be revised.
Above all else, the Intergovernmental Conference must complete the work that the Convention ended up being unable to do. That is a matter of political and legal obligation. How are the public to understand a constitutional document that presents them – and I know I am exaggerating – with two different economic philosophies: on the one hand, the social market economy, balanced economic growth and full employment; on the other hand, an open market economy with free competition and merely a high level of employment? I might add that the same applies to other aspects. This makes it important that Amendment No 3 be adopted today and that this House should give the Intergovernmental Conference a clear mandate to do away with the inconsistencies between Part III and Part I.
I would also like to say in unmistakeable terms that I reject all those provisions intended to develop the European Union as a military and interventionist power. That is not Europe’s way of emancipating itself from American hegemony; it will be by way of civil conflict resolution and civil conflict prevention that the European Union will become a respected partner on the international stage. Nor is it acceptable for the Constitution to oblige the Member States to enhance their military capacities at the same time as there is no more money available for social security expenditure, pensions or education, and while new indebtedness is reaching dizzying levels.
I believe that the Intergovernmental Conference should also be guided by the ideals and the spirit of the Convention. It is because the public have a right to see how the second stage of the constitutional process proceeds that the governments should hold their sessions in public and in a transparent manner."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples