Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-01-18-Speech-3-234"

PredicateValue (sorted: default)
rdf:type
dcterms:Date
dcterms:Is Part Of
dcterms:Language
lpv:document identification number
"en.20060118.20.3-234"2
lpv:hasSubsequent
lpv:speaker
lpv:spoken text
". Mr President, honourable Members, in this first plenary part-session of the year I should like to wish all of you an excellent 2006. From the Constitutional point of view, I believe it can only be better than last year. I hope, as the person responsible both for Constitutional issues and for interinstitutional affairs, that we can continue our fruitful, effective and close cooperation. Fourthly, I support your rejection of piecemeal implementation of the Constitution. The reason for that is simple - it has to do with respect. Respect for those who said ‘no’ and for those who have already ratified, and respect for the institutional balance. Cherry-picking could give the impression that the Union is trying to circumvent the results of national referenda and is liable to impair the overall institutional balance. We should respect the difference between our institutions and those in the Member States and, most of all, when we embark on various praiseworthy initiatives and projects we should always respect each country’s democratic traditions. All of us play important, but different, roles. In conclusion, I would stress that we cannot discuss these issues without entering into political debate and discussing political priorities. European citizens will see that there are political differences in Europe. This is another forum for discussing political priorities, but without it and without any discussion on constitutional matters nothing will work. We have to combine this process with creating legitimacy for our institutions by delivering the political results that European citizens want, so we have to consider their daily concerns as well as the constitutional issues. I wish to thank the rapporteurs for this report on the period of reflection and the motion for a resolution. I have already discussed it on several occasions with the two Members of the European Parliament who were members of the European Convention. I would like to underline the considerable progress made since the initial considerations and congratulate the co-rapporteurs for the job they have done and also for their ability to take on board the many views expressed during the intense discussions in committee. I will limit my remarks to four points. The first is that we all wish to achieve a constitutional settlement, to make Europe more transparent, more democratic and more effective. The question is how to achieve that settlement after the French and Dutch ‘no’ votes. I was happy to see that all options regarding the Constitution remain open in your resolution. During the reflection period it is essential to listen to citizens, social partners, political parties, and national and regional parliaments without prejudging the result of the wider dialogue and debate. If we do not, this exercise will lose all its value. I also took note of your favourite option. Maintaining the Constitution, however, will not be possible without French and Dutch support with, if necessary, additional clarifications and measures. Recent Eurobarometer surveys have shown that European citizens’ support for the concept of a Constitution for the EU has increased by two percentage points over the past five months to 63%. Therefore, as has been said many times in the Committee on Constitutional Affairs, it is important to change the context rather than the text. That is why the dialogue has to focus on the European project in connection with Constitutional reform, and on the ultimate objective linked to the instruments to deliver it. It is only after the listening exercise based on the results of national debates is complete, that we will be able to draw conclusions on the best Constitutional settlement for Europe. That is also why the Commission wants to focus on policy priorities addressing citizens’ concerns on growth, jobs, employment and security. Secondly, I fully share your resistance to proposals for core groups of certain Member States. What we want is a Europe for everyone, not just for some. The Union is in the process of consolidating the most recent accession process. We still have to work hard to ensure the smooth integration of the new Member States. My view is that any enhanced cooperation must, in all circumstances, be undertaken within the existing Treaties and remain open to all Member States. You can rest assured that the Commission and myself will not support any proposal for enhanced cooperation outside the European Union institutional framework. Thirdly, it seems reasonable to me to draft final conclusions on the reflection period in 2007, under the German or Portuguese Presidency. The June 2006 European Council is clearly a major milestone in this process, but it should not be the end of it. It will, of course, be up to the European Council to decide on any potential extension of the reflection period beyond the June 2006 extension already suggested by the Austrian Presidency. In any case, as announced in Plan D, the Commission will prepare a communication for the June European Council setting out its thinking on the initial feedback received during the period of reflection, and this will be based on the national visits currently being undertaken by the President, myself and fellow Commissioners, a special Eurobarometer report, discussion forums and the 9 May conferences. This synthesis report should explain the background and approach taken by the Commission over the last year, outline the initial results of the listening exercise and provide a series of conclusions for the Austrian Presidency on the next steps to be taken. This will complement the factual report that will be prepared by the Austrian Presidency on the basis of contributions from the Member States."@en1
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata

Named graphs describing this resource:

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

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph