Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-01-11-Speech-2-074"

PredicateValue (sorted: default)
rdf:type
dcterms:Date
dcterms:Is Part Of
dcterms:Language
lpv:document identification number
"en.20050111.5.2-074"2
lpv:hasSubsequent
lpv:speaker
lpv:spokenAs
lpv:translated text
"Mr President, there is plenty of criticism that could be levelled at the Constitutional Treaty, and, although the text is certainly an improvement on what we have at present, the question remains as to whether it is good enough. In my view, there are a few missed opportunities in a number of areas. Let us, for example, consider the election of the President of the European Commission. As I see it, the European public, or at least the European Parliament, should be asked to vote. Indeed, that is what is stated in the new Constitution, but in the first instance there is only one candidate, as opposed to various candidates, so there is no choice. The same applies to codecision: a wonderful European model, a broad majority of peoples and a political majority should apply across the board. That may be what the Constitution stipulates, but very little will be put into practice right now. It follows that there is room for much more efficiency and more democracy. When it comes to ratifying the Constitution, and certainly in countries where a referendum is to be held on it, the debate will not, though, be about subtleties and the differences between the old and new situation. That is a debate reserved for connoisseurs like us. The treaty is about more than these innovations; it is about the text as a whole. We will be voting on a text which is an outline of what we have built up over 50 years of Europe – fifty years of peace, security, free movement of persons, goods, services and capital. If I consider the opportunities and challenges which the Dutch, along with all Europeans, are able to take on in this large Union, then I have no doubts and vote in favour. A referendum will be held in the Netherlands in a few months’ time. I am already opposed to the argument that, as a result of the new Constitutional Treaty, the imminent accession of Turkey would mean that small Member States, such as the Netherlands, would more or less disappear into oblivion within the Union. This is rabble-rousing, because Turkey is a separate decision and the public should, in my view, make up its own mind in a referendum when the time comes. It is, however, also a sign of small-minded thinking. It is in the present institutional chaos of Europe that large Member States can exert disproportionate amounts of influence, and smaller Member States benefit from law and order. I am in favour of proper and democratic governance and against chaos. During the forthcoming referendum, the Dutch Liberals will campaign actively in favour of the EU’s new Constitutional Treaty."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

1http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/English.ttl.gz
2http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/Events_and_structure.ttl.gz
3http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/spokenAs.ttl.gz

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph