Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2004-03-31-Speech-3-039"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20040331.1.3-039"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, Mr President-in-Office of the Council, Mr President of the Commission, ladies and gentlemen, Europe is moving forward with its responses and, after the drama in Madrid, after the one in New York, we have made, and are continuing to make progress in the fight against terrorism. After New York we had a long and difficult negotiation on the European arrest warrant. We had consolidated the advances concerning Europol and Eurojust. Behind the scenes, though, implementation is so slow and so heartbreaking for our fellow countrymen that it is necessary to find other means to force the hands of the Heads of State or Government. Indeed, having given their agreement to the Council, they then forget to implement the subject of the agreement in their own countries. Take the European warrant; it is not right that so many States have not yet ratified this essential tool as we wanted them to do after New York.
Today, after Madrid, Mr de Vries, a former Member of this House, has been appointed coordinator. Everyone is delighted, because everyone knows his determination in these matters, everyone knows his determination to work to establish a European prosecutor. If, though, he has neither the necessary resources or a clear mandate, we shall be left powerless. It was under the pressure of events that a coordinator was appointed, even though, in fact, there is an underlying idea, an intuition, one that inspired many of us within the Convention itself: the idea that, with regard to matters where the Heads of State or Government are entitled to their say and must be able to cooperate actively with the tools of a European vision, tools that are in the hands of a Commission, better coordination between various European authorities is needed. What we have done for the Minister of Foreign Affairs, we understand that, in a way, we shall have to do in the field of justice, security, and freedom. In fact, this coordinator is a foretaste of what must one day, doubtless, be implemented. Today, though, he has no relation, no link with the Commission. I believe that it is necessary to reflect on this if we want to be effective in coordinating the resources of the fight against terrorism.
In this spirit, Mr President-in-Office of the Council, you have in your hands the future of the European Constitution, because you now have a defined mandate with a somewhat difficult schedule, one that is certainly welcome in so far as it provides Greater Europe, which will be finally reunited on 1 May, with a Constitution in the short term, but that is, all the same, somewhat problematic in view of the elections to the European Parliament. Put simply, what I want to do is to draw your attention to the elements that this House regards as essential. There is, as others before me have said, the question of Parliament's budgetary powers. Beyond this, though, I see a risk of backing down with regard to what was enacted in the Convention: I want to speak about the prospect of a European prosecutor, I want to speak about qualified majority voting where it was possible to get it, in the fiscal and social area, even though this is not enough. I see a risk of backing down in the field of increased cooperation and linking clauses. I see a risk that the revision of the Constitution may not be dealt with. This would be very serious.
Finally, Mr President, you have a very serious problem where the composition of the Commission is concerned. I know the tendency: it is to give one commissioner per Member State. I again want to draw your attention, however, to a proposal that is on the table, that of not specifying the number of commissioners in the Constitution, and leaving to the President of the Commission, with the European Council, the freedom to define the balance of the composition of the Commission, by simply imposing a limit of one commissioner per Member State at the most. Perhaps, for a certain time, this will lead to a Commission of 25 that will have to get organised, but at least we would leave ..."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples