Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2004-03-10-Speech-3-171"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20040310.4.3-171"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"In this joint debate on enlargement, it has once again been said that the constitutional treaty prepared by the Convention would provide a ‘framework to enable the enlarged Union to work effectively’, and that it should be adopted as quickly as possible, even before 1 May 2004.
This is not correct. The reality is in fact the opposite. The draft Constitution is entirely unsuitable for an enlarged Europe for two reasons:
First of all, it maps out a State structure that is much too heavy and too rigid for a diversity of countries with very differing concerns. In an enlarged Europe, we in fact need a streamlined and flexible cooperation structure, which allows for a variety of forms much more easily than the current draft Constitution.
Secondly, the draft Constitution provides for European institutions mainly functioning by majority, which is difficult to conceive in an enlarged Europe with no national safeguard clause. As the accession of Turkey appears to be under serious consideration by our governments – a possibility that I personally object to – have they thought about the far-reaching consequences of the reforms that they are proposing, which risk giving Turkey a central decision-making role in a Europe with uniform rules?"@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples