Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-12-03-Speech-3-063"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20031203.6.3-063"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Following the IGC meeting in Naples, it is clear that there is relentless pressure from the European institutions to impose the Convention’s draft Constitution and, thus, a central and supranational power to run the enlarged Europe. In our opinion, the correct solution would be the opposite of this: accepting the idea of a differentiated Europe, ensuring greater respect for national sovereignty and clearly organising the process of variable geometry.
In other words, the countries, such as Spain or Poland, that are being accused today of slowing the progress of the IGC with regard to the Convention by defending their national interests are in actual fact defending the general interest of Europe, which is to keep free nations and national democracies alive.
With regard to the two major topics of debate that will be discussed once again at the next Council in Brussels – the composition of the Commission and the qualified majority in the Council – we reiterate our unchanging proposal: the key aspect is to recognise a national right of popular opposition, which each population could exercise formally against a European decision. This innovation, which would give control back to the national democracies and help to compensate for the democratic deficit, would also put all of the discussions on the Commission and the Council into perspective."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples