Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2004-07-21-Speech-3-030"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20040721.1.3-030"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Mr President, the agreement reached on the Constitution at the June European Council was a bad one for Europe. My position on the Constitution – and that of my fellow European Democrats – is clear and well known. We believe that the Constitution is a mistake. We believe that Europe does not need a Constitution: countries have constitutions, and the EU is not – nor should it seek to become – a country or a state.
The Laeken Summit of 2001 called upon the European Convention and the IGC to ensure that the outcome of their work brought the European institutions closer to the people. I do not think that has happened. The Constitution does nothing to involve the nation states and people more closely in the decision-making processes of the Union. In fact, with major extensions in majority voting, the powers of the centre are greatly increasing. This is a view that has perhaps been endorsed by the remarks recently made by the Dutch Foreign Minister, suggesting that we need to engage in a process of self-reflection with a view to deciding whether some policy areas should not be transferred back from European to national level. These are interesting remarks from the government that now holds the presidency of the Union for the next six months. They demonstrate that I am not alone in putting forward these ideas.
Europe could have chosen a better way. It could have decided to tidy up the treaties in a simplifying document; it could have given national parliaments a real say in EU legislation; it could have looked more closely at what is done by national governments; and clearly it could have set out an obligation for the Union to tackle fraud and maladministration. I feel that we have missed an opportunity.
I welcome the fact that France is to have a vote on the Constitution. I welcome the debate initiated by Mr Stoiber on a possible referendum in Germany. It is right that the people have the final say in deciding their own future. The leader of my own party believes in a live-and-let-live Europe, in other words, one where those who wish to integrate more closely should be enabled to do so, provided that those of us who do not are not compelled to do so. When the referendums are held, I hope and believe that many people will take the opportunity to vote for a Europe of diversity and not uniformity, and a Europe that respects the rights of nation states."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples