Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-01-19-Speech-4-172"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20060119.20.4-172"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
The debate on the great European issues that has gone on over the last few months has been characterised more by emotion than by thought. Whether we are talking about the Constitution, the services directive or Reach – to name but a few – the challenge before us is to simplify the language we use and the way we communicate, in order not to leave the field to the so-called populists. Scarcely any other institution possesses so many structures and so many means for supporting communication, yet scarcely any other institution uses a language the complexity of which leaves it wide open to deliberate or involuntary misinterpretations. All too often, the two things that fall by the wayside in any debate about Europe are common reference to what has been achieved and an explanation of the new in that context. There are in essence two great schools of thought where the future of Europe is concerned. One of the things that the Constitution did was to show how those who want more Europe and those who want less combine to bring Europe to a standstill – not in the way they think, but in the way they vote. If these contradictions are made clearer and more readily comprehensible for the citizen’s benefit, a new and real European debate will be the result. The Duff report goes in the right direction; all that is needed is action."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples