Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2004-01-14-Speech-3-013"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20040114.1.3-013"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, before Christmas, the group chairmen were in Dublin to negotiate with the Irish Presidency. We spent some useful hours with Bertie and Dick and were able to welcome them. In this House, I shall welcome Mr Ahern and Mr Roche on a more official basis. I am certain that, as a small country, Ireland will deliver an outstanding Presidency.
I myself come from a small country in which we are on first-name terms with the prime minister and his closest rivals for the job. My friends in Dublin sometimes meet Bertie Ahern at the local pub. That closeness to the electorate is something to which I would ask the Irish Presidency to draw attention at the next European Council. How do we put the people at the centre of the debates concerning the Treaty? How do we make the voters into those who decide, in the EU too? Do not get involved in the present fight concerning the weighting of votes in the Council of Ministers. Do not breach an agreement entered into with Poland. Look at the minority statement from the Convention which, in actual fact, contains the key to the future.
We propose, as the main rule, that decisions must be made by 75% of the countries in the Council of Ministers, with all the countries being equal and having one vote each. The 75% must also represent half of the voters. This is out of particular consideration for the most populous countries, but we also propose that special account be taken of all the electorates: all the EU countries, both large and small, should have the right of veto on really vital matters.
We accept that majority decisions are the point of departure. It should be possible to use the right of veto if this is agreed to at a public meeting in the national parliament and if the prime minister is prepared to defend its use at the next EU summit. This is a sustainable compromise which combines the democratic principle that the voters always have the last word with efficient international decision-making. Without the right of veto on vital issues, no efficiency is achieved. There are merely permanent battles and confusion where the Member States do not administer the common decisions.
Look, however, at the statistics for the implementation of EU legislation. That is the reality. Parliamentary democracy must not be ignored. Without majority decisions, however, the result is permanent discussions of practical issues too, in relation to which all the countries have a common interest in its being possible, as a general rule, for them to vote their way to solutions. We need to take both considerations equally seriously.
The draft Convention has neglected to satisfy parliamentary democracy in our Member States, and it will, therefore, scarcely be possible to agree to such democracy in the form of fair referendums, with full information supplied. Let it come down to a test, however. Instead of organising a second referendum in Ireland if the electorate votes no, you should involve the other countries in the demand that the draft Constitution be voted on in referendums in all the countries and, preferably, on the same day throughout the EU.
Dear Irish Presidency, we look forward to cooperating with you and will offer our affectionate, critical, constructive and democratic opposition."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples