Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-05-31-Speech-3-069"
|Predicate||Value (sorted: default)|
|dcterms:Is Part Of|
|lpv:document identification number|
"Mr Verhofstadt, I believe that today you have written the next chapter of your book which I, like many others, read with great attention and pleasure. Because your book lacked a section about ‘what to do’ following its analysis of what we need, and today you have said it very clearly: to continue with the process of ratifying the European Constitution. Why continue with the process of ratifying the European Constitution? So that we have more countries that have ratified it, of course, but also in order to make the period of reflection real. For what purpose? In order to explain to the citizens what it will cost us not to have the Constitution or, to put it in positive terms, the added value that the European Constitution will provide. The time will come when we find a solution in order to unblock this constitutional crisis. It will be after the French and Dutch elections. I would say to you that, since the Constitution was drawn up amongst governments and parliaments within a Convention, this crisis must be resolved amongst governments and parliaments. I believe that that was one of the great conclusions of the Parliamentary Forum of 8 and 9 May, which had a very positive result. We must be orthodox in terms of the content of the Constitution, but heterodox in terms of the ultimate solution. I believe that, in this regard, we in this House agree with you."@en1
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples