Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2007-12-12-Speech-3-011"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20071212.2.3-011"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, the President of the Commission rightly referred to one of the core challenges of the present time, namely the question of how we should organise home-affairs policy in Europe on the basis of the Treaty that is to be signed tomorrow, on the basis of the new legal structures of the European Union. He cited the problem of mass immigration into Europe as an example of the way in which an internal European area, by which I mean a legal area that has external borders but no longer has internal borders, can be organised. We do that on an intergovernmental level.
a beautiful city, a splendid atmosphere, no Cohn-Bendit there, so just magnificent!
We went home afterwards and experienced the divorce. And today we are off to the next wedding, this time in Lisbon: splendid atmosphere, wonderful city, no Cohn-Bendit – everything just as it should be. I only hope that another petition for divorce will not follow in Ireland. In short, ladies and gentlemen, we have no reason to celebrate until the Treaty has actually been ratified in all 27 countries.
It makes sense to ratify the Treaty. Those anti-Europeans who wanted to scupper the constitution because they believed they could halt the integration process that way have certainly been taught a lesson by this Treaty. It is true that the Lisbon Treaty does not satisfy all our wishes, but it is better than destroying Europe by constantly opposing integration.
And those who rejected the draft Constitutional Treaty because they believed it was short on social policy and needed a stronger social element will not find that extra element in this new Treaty, but the proclamation of the Charter of Human Rights and its integration into the Treaty have made it possible to realise a number of fundamental social rights.
There were no doubt reasons for the rejection of the draft constitution by extremists on both sides. I can sympathise more with those who rejected it on social grounds than with the anti-Europeans, who reject the Treaty on principle because they do not want this Union.
One thing, however, is quite clear: this Treaty can only be a stepping stone. It is a step forward, but it does not take us far enough. Nevertheless, it is a step that must be taken now in any event. I hope that this marriage is for life and that the divorce lawyers will stay at home, for none of the challenges of the coming years – and my honourable colleague Mr Swoboda will shortly be speaking about Kosovo – will be surmountable unless we set Europe on firm institutional foundations.
No one should be under any illusions – the Convention implementing the Schengen Agreement is not the law of the European Union; it is not Community law, but an intergovernmental instrument. That in itself shows that we still have a structural defect, for intergovernmental instruments are primarily a form of law that focuses on national sovereignty rather than on the creation of an effective European framework. This is a fundamental distinction. The fact is that law based on national sovereignty enables every manifestation of national particularism and every individual reservation to block the progress of the Union. In view of the challenges facing us in the field of migration policy, that is something we cannot afford.
To that extent, President Barroso is perfectly correct, for it is wrong that some – in southern Europe, for example – should be under intense migratory pressure, while those at the other geographical ends of Europe wash their hands of the problem. That cannot go on indefinitely. The step we are now taking in relaunching the integration process on the basis of a new Treaty is therefore a first step that must be followed by more, by which I mean closer integration in other areas, including those of the common home-affairs policy, the common security policy and the common justice policy.
This brings me to my second point, which is of particular importance to us at the present moment. We shall be formally signing the Charter of Fundamental Rights today. Splendid! An exquisite table, magnificent chairs, a congenial atmosphere, as always.
Yes, wonderful Members of Parliament too. Some Members, however, are nicer than others, Mr Cohn-Bendit.
The setting will be marvellous, as always. Yet it all reminds me of a close friend of mine who has been married several times in his life and has also filed for divorce several times. And every time I attended his wedding and was about to go home after the solemn celebration and the magnificent function that had been laid on, I would say to him, ‘You gave us a great day, as always’. I feel a bit like that today. I was in Rome – along with you, Mr Pöttering, and a number of other Members who are here today. We experienced that in Rome. It was like a wedding – celebratory, fine food, a wonderful ceremony, great music"@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
"(Interjection by Daniel Cohn-Bendit: And magnificent Members of Parliament!)"1
"(Interjection by Daniel Cohn-Bendit: Beautiful city!)"1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples