Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-01-19-Speech-4-166"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20060119.20.4-166"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
The pause for reflection on the European Constitution has so far been characterised more by silence than by debate. Although Parliament, by means of this resolution, is making a creditable attempt at re-launching the debate, the resolution also gives voice to the expectation that one result of the period of reflection will be the retention of the present-day text of the Constitution, something I regard as deceptive and undesirable, in that it takes no account of the rejection of the Constitution by the French and Dutch electorates. It is lamentable that Parliament has, on this point, disregarded the warning given by its rapporteurs, Mr Duff and Mr Voggenhuber, and it is for that reason that I have abstained from taking part in the final vote on the resolution.
The period of reflection must be used to prepare agreement on a procedure that is as democratic as possible for a new reform of the Treaties. In saying ‘no’ to the Constitution, the French and the Dutch were certainly not saying ‘yes’ to the way Europe is today."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples