Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2007-05-23-Speech-3-246"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20070523.20.3-246"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, I shall begin by commenting on something we have just heard. You said, Prime Minister, that your government is in favour of a legal framework for services. Thank you very much for that; now perhaps you can say that to the Group of the European People’s Party (Christian Democrats) and European Democrats, to whom you have close links, who, this morning, rejected that very idea.
As the President of our Parliament introduced this debate in Dutch, I, too, Prime Minister, should like speak a few words in it. If, in future, the Foreign Affairs Minister is called the High Representative of Her Majesty the Queen of the Netherlands, then I have no problem with that, provided that he does his job.
What is crucial is not what he is called, but rather what he is meant to do.
I am a great admirer of the Dutch people; the Netherlands is a wonderful country with a great tradition, a country with a tradition of seafaring, and seafarers have always been courageous people. It was Dutch people who first sailed round Cape Horn and gave it its name. I, for one, get the feeling that they have today embarked on a ship and set the sails. Mr Goebbels has already pulled the flag down to half mast. I am less sceptical; I get the impression that you, today, have hoisted the flag halfway up again, so I urge you to hoist it all the way up, and I can promise you that this House will put wind in your sails, so that then, Mr Balkenende, you will be sailing towards a compromise.
Yesterday saw Mr Prodi expressing his own willingness to compromise; he is completely in favour of the Constitution. If you want half a constitution and you and he can meet one another halfway, we will end up with three-quarters of it, and a 75% constitution would be the Constitution without the anthem, without the flag and with a foreign minister called by another title. It would be a good result.
I would like, Prime Minister, to refer to two of the observations you made, and which I see as the most important things you said in your speech. ‘I hope that we can concentrate on what unites us and not on what divides us.’ That was an encouraging thing to say. Until then, we had been under the impression that the Netherlands was focusing on what divides us rather than on what unites us.
If that is meant to be an announcement to the effect that you and your government are willing to make compromises rather than insisting that the Dutch ‘no’ must result in fundamental change in Europe, if it is meant to mean that the Dutch ‘no’ means that the Constitution will not enter into force in its present form, but instead in some other, with some other comprehensive reform that will make the European Union more efficient, and that you, to that end, are prepared to make compromises and then defend them at home, then that, Mr Balkenende, was a good speech.
By it, then, we will judge you, for I was in Rome, where we met, and where I saw you sign the Constitution with a golden pen. As you know, I keep a watchful eye on Dutch domestic politics. Compared with the other battles you have had to endure in the Netherlands, the battle for the constitution was – if I may put it that way – a rather restrained one. Nobody will regret it if you land more punches in future.
Europe must learn to land more punches, but it will not do that on the basis on Nice or of ‘Nice minus’; that will not make Europe a better fighter, but rather less able to take the action that needs to be taken in such situations as that in the Middle East, where, it is worth remembering, 13 000 European troops are stationed on the border between Lebanon and Israel in pursuance of the UNIFIL mandate, and I ask you also to think of the Gaza Strip in Palestine, where we are in the thick of the chaos, and where the place is getting like Somalia. Why is Europe not represented there by a foreign minister who could get something done? It is because of the unanimity rule in the Council, which is preventing Europe from taking action.
I have nothing against Calvinistic self-denial. I gather that you want no more flags, no anthem, and no foreign minister. Good: Beethoven’s symphonies have survived revolutions and wars; they will outlive the European Constitution too."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples