Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2008-06-18-Speech-3-063"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20080618.2.3-063"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
"The word heard – and read – most frequently in this Chamber today has been ‘respect’. I trust you will permit me to add that we must also respect certain facts, and I would like to highlight the following.
Firstly: ratification of a new treaty on European Union falls within the exclusive competence of the Member States. Exclusive. The Council has absolutely no role in these processes, and the Presidency even less.
Next fact: each Member State carries out this process in accordance with its own rules, which that State formulates in its own independent and sovereign way. This brings us perhaps to the essential point. Certain Member States have carried out parliamentary ratification or will do so, and one is bound by a referendum. Yet this does not mean that there is anything wrong with parliamentary ratification. I firmly reject the assertions of those who believe that parliamentary ratification is imperfect or less democratic than a referendum. This is not true. This is not true. There is absolutely nothing wrong with parliamentary ratification. From the viewpoint of the European Union it is entirely equal to other democratic processes.
Third fact: each Member State speaks for itself. The Irish voters spoke for Ireland. They did not speak for any other Member State. This means that every other Member State has exactly the same right. Eighteen Member States have already ratified the Lisbon Treaty, the others have not yet made a pronouncement, and the view of the Presidency is that ratifications must continue. Those who claim that the Lisbon Treaty is dead, those who are demanding an immediate halt to the ratification process, are denying the right of Member States to speak for themselves, the same right that they are so vehemently defending in the case of Ireland.
Fourth fact: we have already been in this situation and we found a solution. In this case, too, we will find one, based on the reasons why this situation arose, but the Presidency does not wish to speculate on this. The Presidency does not wish to get dragged into a discussion of whether perhaps the Treaty was too complicated, whether there was something wrong with the communication, or whether perhaps, as Mr De Rossa stressed, a great many lies were told. No, we will leave it to our Irish colleagues to analyse the reasons for such an outcome and also to propose their vision of a possible way out. And we will find that way out, of this I am certain. We will find it. And the European Council meeting tomorrow marks the start of our search for the way out.
And the final fact: the item on the agenda for today’s morning sitting was not the result of the Irish referendum, but preparations for the European Council. The Presidency will conduct the discussion in the European Council in this way to make it clear that Europe has not ground to a halt, that Europe continues to function, and for this reason we will be addressing numerous other topics in line with the planned agenda.
We will address the problem of food and oil prices, we will address economic, social and environmental topics, we will address international development challenges and we will address the issue of the Western Balkans. Here I would also like to respond to Mr Titley – there are no direct implications for the European Union’s enlargement policy, which will continue, as will the European Neighbourhood Policy and other policies.
Thank you to everyone, and especially to those who gave their views on these other topics, and I am confident that the European Council will progress successfully."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples