Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-06-14-Speech-3-039"
|Predicate||Value (sorted: default)|
|dcterms:Is Part Of|
|lpv:document identification number||
"Mr President, the purpose of this debate is to provide President Borrell with something interesting to say when he speaks at the European Council tomorrow. I fear that if Parliament simply agrees the line proposed by the PPE-DE and PSE Groups, we will be signing up to the same paralysis that exists within the Council. President Barroso is quite correct in saying that we must make progress on policies, and a ‘Messina 50’ is probably a positive proposal, but what is the point of extending the period of reflection without providing a target and a purpose for the reflection? Procrastination is not a credible policy. Waiting for the successors of Chirac, Balkenende and Blair to be thrusting federalists is a crazy fantasy. What we require is for the European Council to establish a rendez-vous with a decision in the autumn of 2007, setting up a fresh conference to renegotiate Part 3 of the Constitution. These are not just legal problems, President-in-Office, but a profound political crisis which we must address. I expect it is going to be possible to ring-fence the classical constitutional provisions that we find in the first and second parts of the Constitution, around which consensus still exists. However, it is Part 3 which contains the common policies that have so greatly disappointed public opinion in France and the Netherlands and in several other places, notably as regards social and economic policy and the issue of borders. In fact, we have little choice. We either try to improve the product and market it effectively within the court of public opinion, or we consign the whole project to oblivion."@en1
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples