Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-11-05-Speech-3-087"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20031105.7.3-087"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, Mr Antonione, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, the news from the Intergovernmental Conference (IGC) paints a picture of disagreements and difficulties. To any disinterested, objective observer, that comes as no surprise. Only those who promote the false idea that a supposed consensus was obtained within the Convention can feign astonishment. We all know that the results of the Convention would not be accepted as a democratic consensus anywhere where the principles of democracy are known and respected, where votes are taken. We now have harsh proof of the contrary, found in the character of the IGC itself, the only institution complying with the Treaties and wielding the democratic and legal legitimacy to make decisions. Those who sought to diminish the IGC, who still insist on doing so, are therefore on the wrong track.
I salute the Italian Presidency and the dedicated fashion in which it has performed its work. It is crystal clear here today that the blame for any potential failures will lie not with this Presidency but with those who persist in forcing the issue, in riding roughshod over the legitimate rights of the Member States and in weakening democracy and the Rule of Law. Of all of these, I would point to Jacques Chirac’s most unfortunate opening speech, which was followed inauspiciously by Gerhard Schroeder, attempting to use financial blackmail to stifle debates in the IGC and using Community funds to threaten some Member States. That was the worst possible start to the conference, as it set a highly negative tone, far indeed from the positive efforts and goodwill of the Italian Presidency. I do not know if anyone felt intimidated, but the whole thing deserves to be roundly condemned. This is not the way!
On the other hand, the German Chancellor appears to be softening his dogmatic initial positions, having indicated during a visit to Bratislava some days ago that he might be prepared to accept the loud calls for the Commission to be appointed on the basis of one Commissioner per Member State, with equal rights. I welcome these signals – they are sparks of hope and promising gestures. That is the way. I hope that these signals will prove genuine and will extend to other items on our agenda: respect for the principle of subsidiarity, express guarantees of respect for the primacy of national constitutional law, transparency in the Council’s legislative operations, recognition in the preamble of our Christian heritage, retaining the rotating Presidency or finding a satisfactory solution to the various problems caused by the unsuitable duration of each term, the elimination of terminological flights of fancy such as ‘Minister for Foreign Affairs’ or ‘Constitution for Europe’, the deletion or strict rationing of flexibility or
clauses so as not to cheat the system for revising the Treaties, and so on.
The further away we move from the dictates of a Cabinet, even if it calls itself a Praesidium
the more successful the IGC will be. The IGC will only fail if the inflexibility of certain so-called ‘big guns’ makes them ‘small’, makes them want to overturn equilibriums that are essential to the unselfish quest for European integration. The more the IGC respects and pushes forward with the sacred founding principle of equality between Member States, the more it attends prudently and realistically to the actual state of public opinion on national identity and European identity, the broader the support it will garner.
It would help to remind the French President that the result of his diplomacy, of his European Presidency, was the Treaty of Nice itself. That fact may help him and others to calm the excessive nerves they so often display. Nice is the Treaty in force. More than that, it is a Treaty which is not even completely in force yet. There is no hurry, therefore, no drama, no cause for despair or distress. Nice is that alternative consensus which so many people invoke; it is also, for now, the only real consensus, the Treaty we prepared in readiness for the main challenge facing us now: enlargement. Let us not, therefore, put the timetable ahead of the crux of the matter. The reform of the Treaties must be a good reform, a lasting reform, one which allows everybody time to speak and be heard, to form real consensuses, to build and entrench authentic, lasting unanimity. This must not be a reform done in a hurry, destined to fall at the first hurdle, as the text of the Convention is currently doing. We believe that the European Union cannot fail. The European Union must not fail."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples