Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-06-14-Speech-3-167"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20060614.13.3-167"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Firstly, the debate on the future of Europe does not simply boil down to the constitutional debate, and nor does the debate on the constitutional treaty cover the entire debate on the future of Europe.
I do not believe that this is more glamorous and attractive to the citizens. It is necessary, although I doubt how urgent it is. It should certainly take place in full view of the citizens.
In my opinion, however, what is really needed is to update and consolidate the structural decision-making model of the EU within a framework that is democratic and that respects national identity and diversity, given that the EU in its current configuration finds it difficult to cope with the realities of life with 25 Member States, let alone 27, 28 or 29.
I feel therefore that the solution lies in a fresh debate when the societies that are most hostile to this proposal show that they are ready. This may also take the form of restricting the ‘constitutional’ impulse to a more modest and realistic institutional reform that is vital to the EU’s new life.
Most importantly, though, there needs to be a response to what actually concerns the citizens, especially economically speaking. There is a lack of policy, a lack of results and a lack of growth and jobs in an economy that is irrevocably in the throes of change. The truth is that these challenges are, for our citizens, a matter of priority in relation to the Constitution."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples