Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-05-16-Speech-2-013"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20060516.4.2-013"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, many thanks, Commissioner Wallström. You are one of the really prominent people in the Commission who are speaking up not only for Plan D but also for the democratisation of Europe as a whole and for greater effectiveness in the Commission's activities. You are – and I say this on behalf of our group – one of the personalities who can be described as an asset for progress in Europe. Your speech once again made it clear that you, as the Vice-President of the Commission responsible for Plan D, are someone in whom we can trust and on whom we can rely.
What recognisable results have so far come out of this period of reflection, which, as Mr Méndez de Vigo said, is continually threatening to degenerate into a siesta?
What the citizens of Europe want is more transparency. They want a better understanding of what happens in the institutions. They want a clearer division of competences: who does what, where, when and on what legal basis? They want greater effectiveness in legislation and administration. They want the subsidiarity principle to be strengthened. Not everything has to be done in Brussels – some things can be done at home. Not everything, though, can be solved at home, and those things should be regulated by Brussels. That is a clear message. The people therefore also want the EU to have a stronger presence in international politics. They want the EU to be effective in fighting crime. We know all of that, and it is up to us, the Council and the Commission to achieve it. It is all in the Constitution, though. We all know that we need the Constitution if we are to meet these demands from the public. At the end of the period of reflection, it is now clearer than ever that it is not possible to meet the demands of the public on the basis of the Treaty of Nice. It was not possible with 15 Member States – which is why Nice needed to be amended and replaced by the Constitution – and we will soon have 27 Member States and still do not have the Constitution. How can it be possible now? The Commission is the guardian of the Treaties. Without a shadow of a doubt, nobody should be fighting harder for the Constitution than the President of the Commission.
I should therefore like to thank you, Mrs Wallström, but I would also say one thing quite clearly to the President of the Commission: How can you go into an interparliamentary conference like the one last week, where the overwhelming majority of the national and European parliamentarians present spoke out in favour of the Constitution and the next President-in-Office of the Council Mr Vanhanen declared that, during his Presidency, Finland would symbolically ratify the Constitution, and then, as President of the Commission, raise doubts – and these doubts do exist – as to whether you yourself are prepared to say to the Heads of State or Government: if you do not join with me in implementing the Constitution, the expanded Europe will grind to a halt? I will give you an example: 25 ministers of labour, and representatives of the Commission and the European Parliament, were present at the last informal Council meeting in Luxembourg, at which the Services Directive was discussed. After the initial two and a half hour long debate, each minister could speak for three minutes. That is a long time in comparison with the European Parliament, but was out of all proportion to the matter on the agenda. Europe cannot make any sensible policies in an elephantine body like the Ecofin: it is quite the opposite of good management, clear legislation and efficiency. We are reaching the limits of the current structures. If we want to make Europe more democratic, more transparent, more efficient – if we want to deliver to the people – we need to act, not talk. That is why we need the Constitution. As long as the Bureau of the Commission, and in particular the President, is sending messages that raise doubts about whether that institution is really determined to implement the Constitution, the opponents of the Constitution could well believe that we have given up. No, those who support the Constitution are behind you, Mrs Wallström, and they are in the majority. There are those in this Parliament who oppose the Constitution.
Those people now raising their voices are in a minority. The overwhelming majority of this House are in favour of the Constitution. The overwhelming majority of the Member States are in favour of the Constitution. The overwhelming majority of the Commission are in favour of the Constitution. We therefore all have opportunities, so let us fight together, and that goes for Mr Barroso too."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples