Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-06-22-Speech-3-040"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20050622.13.3-040"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Madam President, no is no. The Dutch ‘no’ is final. Those are not my words but of Mr Balkenende, the Dutch Prime Minister, in today’s
. Following the Dutch and French voters’ rejection of the proposed text of the Constitution, most national governments are now opting for a time of reflection. Will this be a time for those in government to reflect on their tactics or will it offer the opportunity to change and improve the Constitution by means of a broad social discussion involving the general public and social organisations? My party proposed a broad social discussion of this kind, and that proposal was adopted by the Dutch parliament; how will the Council help to ensure that there can be one across Europe?
Looking back, some advocates of the rejected text consider the no vote, above all, to be a vote against further enlargement to include countries with a low standard of living, particularly Turkey, and against financial solidarity with the poorest regions. It is probably far more important that many people feel angry about the differences that have grown over the years in terms of prosperity and input and about the uncertain future. They fear that Europe will increasingly resemble the USA. They are also indignant about projects that are vulnerable to fraud and about subsidies being poured into large agricultural companies. The unnecessary pumping of structural fund monies among the richest Member States is another cause of irritation. Does Mr Juncker agree with me that the neoliberal policy of emphasis on the market has helped foster opposition to this Constitution among the voters?
It is a good thing that last week, the Council did not make any hasty decisions about random cutbacks or the exclusion of new Member States. First of all, we must discuss what we want, about what Europe does and does not do. Studies can show that people do want to tackle the large-scale and cross-border issues in order to protect man and the environment more effectively, while they want minimal interference in national, regional and local democracy. Is the Council prepared to start such a study? I would like a response to that."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples