Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2007-06-07-Speech-4-015"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20070607.3.4-015"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, the events surrounding the G8 and its probable failure – which I myself will certainly not cry over – urge us to look to the European Council as at an important time for the European Union, in which consistency and ambition must go hand in hand, not least because the President of this Parliament has accepted that this process should be intergovernmental only. I am very concerned that we will soon witness a repeat of the nights of Nice and I regret that this Parliament has proved unable to fight harder for a more significant role in the current process.
The key issue for us is not to bow to the temptation to remain on the defensive and wait to see what the opposition says, then come to a nice little agreement with them. This attitude is mistaken and in the past has meant that we have had to adapt to compromises for which we are paying the price today.
I believe that it would be much wiser to go on the offensive and to join with the 18 countries that want a European Constitution. For example, you have spoken of the issue of climate change; however, I understand from various meetings and conversations that the proposed action is in fact little more than a cosmetic change. Why? When you were Commissioner for the Environment, Mrs Wallström, you put forward an intelligent and promising proposal for a protocol on sustainability. Let us consider it again seriously and ensure that, with this text, the debate on climate change translates into greater powers and more money for the European Union, instead of deceiving citizens on this issue with superficial idle talk.
We have many ideas on how to improve the constitutional text: the question of minimum social standards, the issue of taxes, eliminating the right of veto on foreign policy, and improving the review process by removing the veto. I believe that we must be offensive and not merely defensive in this debate.
Another aspect concerns our institution itself: I firmly believe, as does my group, that within the Intergovernmental Conference debate we must revive the issue of European lists. European lists are a way to become more European. This was a point we lost by just a few votes a couple of years ago. However, in preparation for the 2009 European elections, we must return to discussing how to build a real Europe and how citizens can truly vote for a powerful, influential Parliament. For this reason, Madam President, my group and I are by no means content with the idea of having three or four mere observers at the Intergovernmental Conference.
We must have much more than this. We must ensure that there is open dialogue with the Council on the basis of the agreements made in such a way that, as the elected representatives of the European people, we too can have the power to say what we think, because it is through us that citizens can also have their say."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples