Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-01-18-Speech-3-240"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2006-01-18"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:The period of reflection: structure, subjects and context for an assessment of the debate on the EU2
dcterms:Language	"de"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20060118.20.3-240"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2006-01-18-Speech-3-2412
lpv:speaker	lp:Maria Berger2
lpv:spokenAs	member; JURI (2004-07-21--2007-01-10)3 member; PES (2004-07-20--2007-01-10)3 unknown; Sozialdemokratische Partei Österreichs (2004-07-20--2007-01-10)3 substitute; Delegation for relations with Canada (2004-09-15--2007-01-10)3 member; Delegation for relations with the countries of South Asia and the South Asia Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) (2004-09-15--2007-01-10)3 substitute; AFCO (2004-07-21--2007-01-10)3
lpv:translated text	". Mr President, on this occasion I really am speaking from the heart when I say that both rapporteurs are to be congratulated, not only on the report that is now before us, but also on their sustained commitment to the idea of a constitution, even at times when there was little support for it. I hope that that state of affairs is now a thing of the past. I have had the honour of drafting the Legal Affairs Committee’s opinion, which is very much in line with the content of this draft report from the lead Committee. The Legal Affairs Committee’s particular concern has been that we should not prematurely abandon the present draft constitution. In the subject areas that really matter to us, such as the composition and powers of the European Court of Justice, the reordering of the lawmaking process and comitology procedure, and judicial cooperation, we simply do not see that a completely new start would enable us to make any real improvements; indeed, it is more likely to have the opposite effect. While I do regret having had to listen today to the Austrian Presidency’s critical views of the powers of the European Court of Justice and the fact that such criticism comes now not only from that source, it does lead me to think that the solutions provided in this draft constitution really are very good after all. We have good legal reasons for objecting to any hasty division of the draft Constitution. Part I contains a very large number of fundamental principles, and we all know that it was only the derogations contained in Part III that made them politically acceptable. We also, albeit with some regret, have good legal reasons for regarding Parts I and III as connected, and no new structure will be possible without fundamental reworking of Part III. I will conclude by expressing my grave disappointment with the letter from the three presidents of national parliaments. The sight of many former members of the Convention in this Chamber reminds me of the dedication with which members of the national parliaments worked with us on the draft constitution, of the important proposals they had to make, and, in view of that, I simply cannot regard this letter from the three presidents as being the last word on the subject."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph