Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2004-01-28-Speech-3-015"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20040128.3.3-015"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, Mr President-in-Office of the Council, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, if Mr Hänsch is listening, let me say that, although Brussels is a cold place at the moment, those of us who are motivated by the Christian faith are in any case always animated by hope and optimism, and that is why nobody can hamper our work on a European constitution; we too want the sun to shine.
Indeed, Mr Schulz, there are many that I have in mind, but I do not want to make you more famous than you already are.
The constitution will strengthen not only this House, but also the national parliaments, which will be able to appeal, on the grounds of subsidiarity, even against legislation planned by the European Union, and it needs to be pointed out to the constitution’s detractors that it, for the first time, puts local government on a legal footing. In the event of any dispute as to whether, in accordance with the allocation of European competences, it is Europe or the nation-states that are competent, or if regional and local self-government is impaired, it is not merely politically but also legally of vast significance that the European Court of Justice can refer to the article that lays down how local communities govern themselves.
There has been talk of ‘core Europe’ and multiple speeds, and I want to say how much I agree with what both Mr Brok and Mr Hänsch have said. Both have been Members of this House for a long time, so the slight differences of opinion that remain between them despite their intensive cooperation in the Convention can be overcome, and, should they be in need of conciliation, they will find plenty of members of our group ready and available.
There is one goal in Europe towards which we must strive. We have one goal in common, and we want to reach it together. Those who talk in terms of a ‘core Europe’ basically want to revert to intergovernmental cooperation, and I can tell you that our group will not stand for it; we will counter it with determined resistance. Where there is a will there is a way ...
... and we need to respect each other; more than anything else, we need to trust each other. We have confidence in you, Mr President-in-Office, in your government, in your Taoiseach, in the President of the European Council, in your foreign minister, in you personally and in Commissioner Barnier too – that is all I want to say about the Commission today – and, if we take this path together ...
... and with determination, defending the Community of Europe, then, I am convinced, we will eventually be successful.
That it may well be for you lot; red is a fine colour, but not only by its associations with the European Socialists ...
... that is a misuse of the colour.
Let us be serious; let us get back to 2004, which is, as we all know, a crucial year. On 1 May, ten countries will be acceding to the European Union, in which there will then be 450 million people – far more than in the USA and Russia combined, and that figure itself shows by its magnitude how necessary it is that we should have a basis on which these 25 States – and later more – with their 450 million inhabitants may be held together. It is important that we should be able, on 10 and 13 June, to present the voters with a constitution that will show us the way to get through this twenty-first century in peaceful cooperation, as our continent is peacefully integrated.
Let me say, on behalf of the European People’s Party element in our shared group, that we see the constitution as the priority above all others. It was the experience of Nice that prompted us to set up the Convention. It was Parliament – I do not want to claim credit solely for our own group – that called for the Convention. I can tell you that if the Convention had been able to take decisions on its own, we would have a constitution today. What was proposed was, in principle, a right and proper project, and that is why we declare that the failure of the Brussels Summit must not mean the failure of the European Constitution and that everyone concerned should now learn from the Brussels experience. Apportioning blame will get us nowhere, and not only politics but also human experience teach us that blame is never, or almost never, to be attached to one person alone, but that it is always shared by many. We therefore urge everyone to seek out opportunities for compromise and to muster their capacity for it, for there is above all a psychological basis for success, namely that we should respect each other and that the small countries should be treated with the same respect as the large ones. A country may well be large, but that does not mean that it is on the right track.
There are, then, no first and second-class Members of the European Union. One does hear some preposterous arguments used against the constitution; there are those who say that a constitution amounts to centralism and a European superstate, and the very same people who reject a constitution scorn Europe as being, in their eyes, nothing more than a bureaucracy. That is why we say that a constitution is our chosen means of making democracy and parliamentarianism realities in the European Union."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
"(Applause, laughter)"1
"(Interjection by Mr Schulz: And it is deepest red!)"1
"(Interruption by Mr Schulz: Name names!)"1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples