Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-01-18-Speech-3-231"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20060118.20.3-231"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Mr President, this is Parliament’s first response to the crisis created by France and the Netherlands in rejecting the Constitution. It is a chance for us to reflect on what will be lost, especially for Parliament, should we be incapable of salvaging the project and bringing it to a successful conclusion. It is a chance for us to respond to the cacophony of sounds emerging from the ranks of the Council – some simplistic, some in breach of the Treaty, some improbable politically. It is a chance for us to encourage the Commission to be more forthright and incisive to assist us in finding a way forward out of the crisis. It is a chance for Parliament to fill some political space and to bring a focus to the period of reflection.
We know that we cannot achieve all this by ourselves but must have the close collaboration of national parliaments. I must say that I find it fairly curious in this context that the Presidents of the Austrian, Finnish and German Parliaments seem somewhat reluctant to cooperate with us. It is up to the parliaments to decide whether or not they turn up. Those who choose to turn up will have a decisive say in fashioning the decisions about the future of Europe.
The proposals, which received strong support from the committee, set out a parliamentary process. We seek to establish a series of parliamentary forums to debate some fundamental – perhaps even primitive – questions about the nature and purpose of Europe. We want to have the debate about the reform of common policies that the first Convention was in some part frustrated in being denied. This policy debate can and should be radical, but it must take place within the constitutional context and be closely related to issues of competences, to instruments and to procedures.
The first of these forums will take place on 9 May and will address its conclusions to the European Council, which is to take some first decisions about the furtherance of the project.
We would like to draw the period of reflection to a close at the end of 2007 with a firm, clear decision on what to do with the Treaty. As the resolution states, there are, in theory, several scenarios we could follow, but in practice there are only two. The first is to supplement the present Treaty with interpretative protocols or declarations. The second is to make rather more substantive changes to Part III so that we address the legitimate concerns and disquiet expressed by citizens in France and the Netherlands and in some other Member States.
Between and inside the groups there is certainly controversy about the appropriate way to express ourselves. However, on the essentials of salvaging the Treaty, we are strongly united and I commend the resolution to Parliament."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples