Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-12-13-Speech-3-039"

PredicateValue (sorted: none)
lpv:spokenAs
lpv:spokenAs
lpv:spokenAs
lpv:spokenAs
lpv:spokenAs
lpv:spokenAs
lpv:spokenAs
lpv:translated text
"Mr President, sometimes it is worth asking simple, even simplistic, questions: why enlarge the European Union at all? The simple answer is: in order to enlarge the zone of democracy and stability that Europe has created. However, the matter is more complex than appears at first sight. Democracy is not static, but demands constant improvement with the aim of empowering the people. This is what the deepening of integration is fundamentally about. It is in this context that enlargement raises a particular problem, and one that has to be tackled. The European Union insists that future Member States arrive with fully functioning democratic systems – as is proper – yet this overlooks the changes that enlargement brings in its wake within the EU itself. The problem is this: the entry of new Member States involves not just the states but the new citizens who are added through accession. Therefore, the enlargement of the European Union simultaneously means the enlargement of the European demos, the citizens of Europe. Their voice is seldom heard in the enlargement debate, yet leaving out the citizens threatens to exacerbate the democratic deficit. An EU beset by a democratic deficit cannot be fully effective in extending the zone of democracy to future Member States. On the contrary, it could even result in exporting the democratic deficit. That would be completely counterproductive. Enlargement must take the wishes of the citizens of Europe into account when it comes to their own enlargement, and not take their voice for granted. Failure to do so would undermine the goal of extending Europe’s zone of democracy and stability."@et5
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata
"György Schöpflin (PPE-DE ). –"5,19,15,1,18,14,16,11,13,4
lpv:translated text
"Mr President, sometimes it is worth asking simple, even simplistic, questions: why enlarge the European Union at all? The simple answer is: in order to enlarge the zone of democracy and stability that Europe has created. However, the matter is more complex than appears at first sight. Democracy is not static, but demands constant improvement with the aim of empowering the people. This is what the deepening of integration is fundamentally about. It is in this context that enlargement raises a particular problem, and one that has to be tackled. The European Union insists that future Member States arrive with fully functioning democratic systems – as is proper – yet this overlooks the changes that enlargement brings in its wake within the EU itself. The problem is this: the entry of new Member States involves not just the states but the new citizens who are added through accession. Therefore, the enlargement of the European Union simultaneously means the enlargement of the European demos, the citizens of Europe. Their voice is seldom heard in the enlargement debate, yet leaving out the citizens threatens to exacerbate the democratic deficit. An EU beset by a democratic deficit cannot be fully effective in extending the zone of democracy to future Member States. On the contrary, it could even result in exporting the democratic deficit. That would be completely counterproductive. Enlargement must take the wishes of the citizens of Europe into account when it comes to their own enlargement, and not take their voice for granted. Failure to do so would undermine the goal of extending Europe’s zone of democracy and stability."@sl19
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata
"György Schöpflin (PPE-DE ). –"5,19,15,1,18,14,16,11,13,4
lpv:translated text
"Mr President, sometimes it is worth asking simple, even simplistic, questions: why enlarge the European Union at all? The simple answer is: in order to enlarge the zone of democracy and stability that Europe has created. However, the matter is more complex than appears at first sight. Democracy is not static, but demands constant improvement with the aim of empowering the people. This is what the deepening of integration is fundamentally about. It is in this context that enlargement raises a particular problem, and one that has to be tackled. The European Union insists that future Member States arrive with fully functioning democratic systems – as is proper – yet this overlooks the changes that enlargement brings in its wake within the EU itself. The problem is this: the entry of new Member States involves not just the states but the new citizens who are added through accession. Therefore, the enlargement of the European Union simultaneously means the enlargement of the European demos, the citizens of Europe. Their voice is seldom heard in the enlargement debate, yet leaving out the citizens threatens to exacerbate the democratic deficit. An EU beset by a democratic deficit cannot be fully effective in extending the zone of democracy to future Member States. On the contrary, it could even result in exporting the democratic deficit. That would be completely counterproductive. Enlargement must take the wishes of the citizens of Europe into account when it comes to their own enlargement, and not take their voice for granted. Failure to do so would undermine the goal of extending Europe’s zone of democracy and stability."@mt15
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata
"György Schöpflin (PPE-DE ). –"5,19,15,1,18,14,16,11,13,4
lpv:translated text
"Mr President, sometimes it is worth asking simple, even simplistic, questions: why enlarge the European Union at all? The simple answer is: in order to enlarge the zone of democracy and stability that Europe has created. However, the matter is more complex than appears at first sight. Democracy is not static, but demands constant improvement with the aim of empowering the people. This is what the deepening of integration is fundamentally about. It is in this context that enlargement raises a particular problem, and one that has to be tackled. The European Union insists that future Member States arrive with fully functioning democratic systems – as is proper – yet this overlooks the changes that enlargement brings in its wake within the EU itself. The problem is this: the entry of new Member States involves not just the states but the new citizens who are added through accession. Therefore, the enlargement of the European Union simultaneously means the enlargement of the European demos, the citizens of Europe. Their voice is seldom heard in the enlargement debate, yet leaving out the citizens threatens to exacerbate the democratic deficit. An EU beset by a democratic deficit cannot be fully effective in extending the zone of democracy to future Member States. On the contrary, it could even result in exporting the democratic deficit. That would be completely counterproductive. Enlargement must take the wishes of the citizens of Europe into account when it comes to their own enlargement, and not take their voice for granted. Failure to do so would undermine the goal of extending Europe’s zone of democracy and stability."@cs1
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata
"György Schöpflin (PPE-DE ). –"5,19,15,1,18,14,16,11,13,4
lpv:translated text
"Mr President, sometimes it is worth asking simple, even simplistic, questions: why enlarge the European Union at all? The simple answer is: in order to enlarge the zone of democracy and stability that Europe has created. However, the matter is more complex than appears at first sight. Democracy is not static, but demands constant improvement with the aim of empowering the people. This is what the deepening of integration is fundamentally about. It is in this context that enlargement raises a particular problem, and one that has to be tackled. The European Union insists that future Member States arrive with fully functioning democratic systems – as is proper – yet this overlooks the changes that enlargement brings in its wake within the EU itself. The problem is this: the entry of new Member States involves not just the states but the new citizens who are added through accession. Therefore, the enlargement of the European Union simultaneously means the enlargement of the European demos, the citizens of Europe. Their voice is seldom heard in the enlargement debate, yet leaving out the citizens threatens to exacerbate the democratic deficit. An EU beset by a democratic deficit cannot be fully effective in extending the zone of democracy to future Member States. On the contrary, it could even result in exporting the democratic deficit. That would be completely counterproductive. Enlargement must take the wishes of the citizens of Europe into account when it comes to their own enlargement, and not take their voice for granted. Failure to do so would undermine the goal of extending Europe’s zone of democracy and stability."@sk18
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata
"György Schöpflin (PPE-DE ). –"5,19,15,1,18,14,16,11,13,4
lpv:translated text
"Mr President, sometimes it is worth asking simple, even simplistic, questions: why enlarge the European Union at all? The simple answer is: in order to enlarge the zone of democracy and stability that Europe has created. However, the matter is more complex than appears at first sight. Democracy is not static, but demands constant improvement with the aim of empowering the people. This is what the deepening of integration is fundamentally about. It is in this context that enlargement raises a particular problem, and one that has to be tackled. The European Union insists that future Member States arrive with fully functioning democratic systems – as is proper – yet this overlooks the changes that enlargement brings in its wake within the EU itself. The problem is this: the entry of new Member States involves not just the states but the new citizens who are added through accession. Therefore, the enlargement of the European Union simultaneously means the enlargement of the European demos, the citizens of Europe. Their voice is seldom heard in the enlargement debate, yet leaving out the citizens threatens to exacerbate the democratic deficit. An EU beset by a democratic deficit cannot be fully effective in extending the zone of democracy to future Member States. On the contrary, it could even result in exporting the democratic deficit. That would be completely counterproductive. Enlargement must take the wishes of the citizens of Europe into account when it comes to their own enlargement, and not take their voice for granted. Failure to do so would undermine the goal of extending Europe’s zone of democracy and stability."@lt14
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata
"György Schöpflin (PPE-DE ). –"5,19,15,1,18,14,16,11,13,4
lpv:translated text
"Mr President, sometimes it is worth asking simple, even simplistic, questions: why enlarge the European Union at all? The simple answer is: in order to enlarge the zone of democracy and stability that Europe has created. However, the matter is more complex than appears at first sight. Democracy is not static, but demands constant improvement with the aim of empowering the people. This is what the deepening of integration is fundamentally about. It is in this context that enlargement raises a particular problem, and one that has to be tackled. The European Union insists that future Member States arrive with fully functioning democratic systems – as is proper – yet this overlooks the changes that enlargement brings in its wake within the EU itself. The problem is this: the entry of new Member States involves not just the states but the new citizens who are added through accession. Therefore, the enlargement of the European Union simultaneously means the enlargement of the European demos, the citizens of Europe. Their voice is seldom heard in the enlargement debate, yet leaving out the citizens threatens to exacerbate the democratic deficit. An EU beset by a democratic deficit cannot be fully effective in extending the zone of democracy to future Member States. On the contrary, it could even result in exporting the democratic deficit. That would be completely counterproductive. Enlargement must take the wishes of the citizens of Europe into account when it comes to their own enlargement, and not take their voice for granted. Failure to do so would undermine the goal of extending Europe’s zone of democracy and stability."@pl16
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata
"György Schöpflin (PPE-DE ). –"5,19,15,1,18,14,16,11,13,4
lpv:translated text
"Mr President, sometimes it is worth asking simple, even simplistic, questions: why enlarge the European Union at all? The simple answer is: in order to enlarge the zone of democracy and stability that Europe has created. However, the matter is more complex than appears at first sight. Democracy is not static, but demands constant improvement with the aim of empowering the people. This is what the deepening of integration is fundamentally about. It is in this context that enlargement raises a particular problem, and one that has to be tackled. The European Union insists that future Member States arrive with fully functioning democratic systems – as is proper – yet this overlooks the changes that enlargement brings in its wake within the EU itself. The problem is this: the entry of new Member States involves not just the states but the new citizens who are added through accession. Therefore, the enlargement of the European Union simultaneously means the enlargement of the European demos, the citizens of Europe. Their voice is seldom heard in the enlargement debate, yet leaving out the citizens threatens to exacerbate the democratic deficit. An EU beset by a democratic deficit cannot be fully effective in extending the zone of democracy to future Member States. On the contrary, it could even result in exporting the democratic deficit. That would be completely counterproductive. Enlargement must take the wishes of the citizens of Europe into account when it comes to their own enlargement, and not take their voice for granted. Failure to do so would undermine the goal of extending Europe’s zone of democracy and stability."@hu11
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata
"György Schöpflin (PPE-DE ). –"5,19,15,1,18,14,16,11,13,4
lpv:translated text
"Hr. formand! Nogle gange er det umagen værd at stille enkle, sågar overforenklede, spørgsmål: hvor skal EU overhovedet udvides? Det enkle svar er: for at udvide den zone af demokrati og stabilitet, som Europa har skabt. Men sagen er imidlertid mere indviklet end ved første øjekast. Demokrati er ikke statisk, det kræver konstante forbedringer med det formål at give folket mere magt. Det er i bund og grund, hvad dybere integration handler om. Det er i denne sammenhæng, at udvidelse udgør et særligt problem, der skal tages hånd om. EU insisterer på, at kommende medlemsstater ankommer med fuldt funktionsdygtige demokratiske systemer - hvilket er helt på sin plads - men hermed overses de forandringer, der følger i kølvandet på udvidelsen inde i selve EU. Problemet er, at nye medlemsstaters indtræden ikke kun involverer staterne, men også de nye borgere, der kommer til ved tiltrædelsen. Derfor indebærer en udvidelse af EU samtidig en udvidelse af den europæiske befolkning, af borgerne i Europa. Deres stemme høres sjældent i udvidelsesdebatten, men hvis der ikke tages hensyn til borgerne, risikerer vi at forværre det demokratiske underskud. Et EU plaget af demokratisk underskud kan ikke fungere optimalt, når det handler om at udvide den demokratiske zone til kommende medlemsstater. Tværtimod, det kunne endda føre til eksport af det demokratiske underskud, hvilket ville være fuldstændigt i modstrid med hensigten. Der må tages hensyn til de europæiske borgeres ønsker i forhold til udvidelse, når det drejer sig om deres egen udvidelse - deres stemme må ikke tages for givet. I modsat fald undermineres målsætningen om at udvide Europas zone af demokrati og stabilitet."@da2
lpv:translated text
"Arvoisa puhemies, joskus on hyvä esittää yksinkertaisia, jopa tyhmiä kysymyksiä: miksi EU:n pitäisi ylipäänsä laajentua? Yksinkertainen vastaus siihen on: jotta voidaan laajentaa Euroopassa luotua demokratian ja vakauden aluetta. Asia on kuitenkin monimutkaisempi kuin ensi näkemältä vaikuttaa. Demokratia ei ole staattista, vaan sitä on parannettava jatkuvasti niin, että ihmisille annetaan yhä enemmän valtaa. Tästä integraation syventämisessä on loppujen lopuksi kyse. Tässä yhteydessä laajentuminen aiheuttaa erityisen ongelman, joka on ratkaistava. EU edellyttää aivan aiheellisesti, että siihen liittyvillä jäsenvaltioilla on täysin toimiva demokraattinen järjestelmä, mutta samalla ei oteta huomioon sitä, miten laajentuminen muuttaa EU:ta itseään. Ongelma on seuraava: uusien jäsenvaltioiden liittyminen ei koske ainoastaan valtioita, vaan mukana tulee myös uusia kansalaisia. Siksi EU:n laajentuminen tarkoittaa automaattisesti myös Euroopan demoksen eli kansan laajentumista. Kansalaisten mielipidettä kuullaan harvoin laajentumiskeskustelussa, mutta kansalaisten jättäminen keskustelun ulkopuolelle uhkaa kärjistää demokratiavajetta. Demokratiavajeen koettelema EU ei pysty täysin tehokkaasti laajentamaan demokratian aluetta tuleviin jäsenvaltioihin. Päinvastoin voisi jopa olla, että demokratiavaje laajentuu, millä olisi hyvin kielteisiä vaikutuksia. Laajentumisessa on otettava huomioon Euroopan kansalaisten toiveet varsinaisen kansan laajentumisesta, eikä heidän tukeaan saa pitää itsestään selvänä. Muutoin emme pysty saavuttamaan Euroopan demokratian ja vakauden alueen laajentamista koskevaa tavoitettamme."@fi7
lpv:translated text
"Herr talman! Ibland är det värt att ställa enkla, till och med naiva, frågor: Varför ska man utvidga EU över huvud taget? Det enkla svaret är: För att utvidga det område av demokrati och stabilitet som EU har skapat. Men frågan är mer komplex än den förefaller vid första anblicken. Demokrati är inte något statiskt, utan kräver konstanta förbättringar med syfte att ge makt åt folket. Detta är vad den fördjupade integrationen i grunden handlar om. Det är i detta sammanhang som utvidgningen aktualiserar ett särskilt problem, ett som man måste ta itu med. EU insisterar på att framtida medlemsstater kommer med fullt fungerande demokratiska system – vilket är i sin ordning – men ändå förbiser man de förändringar som utvidgningen för med sig inom själva EU. Problemet är följande: Inträdet av nya medlemsstater inbegriper inte bara staterna utan också de nya medborgare som tillkommer genom anslutningen. Därför innebär EU:s utvidgning samtidigt en utvidgning av EU:s folk, EU:s medborgare. Deras röst hörs sällan i utvidgningsdebatten, men om man utelämnar medborgarna hotar detta att förvärra det demokratiska underskottet. Ett EU ansatt av ett demokratiskt underskott kan inte vara helt effektivt när det gäller att utvidga området av demokrati till kommande medlemsstater. Tvärtom kunde det till och med leda till att man exporterar det demokratiska underskottet. Detta skulle fullkomligt motverka syftet. Utvidgningen måste ta medborgarnas önskemål om EU i beaktande när det gäller deras egen utvidgning, och inte ta deras röst för given. Ett misslyckande att göra detta skulle undergräva målet att utvidga EU:s område av demokrati och stabilitet."@sv21
lpv:translated text
"Mijnheer de Voorzitter, soms is het de moeite waard om eenvoudige, zelfs simplistische vragen te stellen: waarom zouden we de Europese Unie überhaupt uitbreiden? Het eenvoudige antwoord is: om de democratische en stabiele zone uit te breiden die Europa heeft gecreëerd. Deze kwestie is echter ingewikkelder dan hij in eerste instantie lijkt te zijn. Democratie is niet statisch, maar vraagt om voortdurende verbetering met als doel de mensen mondiger te maken. Daar draait het bij de verdieping van de integratie in wezen om. Binnen deze context brengt uitbreiding een specifiek probleem met zich mee, een probleem dat moet worden aangepakt. De Europese Unie staat erop dat toekomstige lidstaten toetreden met een volledig functionerend democratisch stelsel (wat ook gepast is), maar gaat voorbij aan de veranderingen binnen de EU zelf die uitbreiding met zich meebrengt. Dit is het probleem: de toetreding van nieuwe lidstaten heeft niet alleen betrekking op de staten zelf, maar ook op de nieuwe burgers die hierdoor toetreden. Een uitbreiding van de Europese Unie betekent daarom tegelijkertijd een uitbreiding van het Europese volk, de burgers van Europa. Hun stem wordt zelden gehoord in het uitbreidingsdebat, ofschoon uitsluiting van de burgers het democratische tekort juist nog groter dreigt te maken. Een EU die ten prooi valt aan een democratische tekort kan niet volledig effectief zijn in het uitbreiden van de democratische zone voor toekomstige lidstaten. In tegendeel: dit zou zelfs kunnen resulteren in het exporteren van de democratische achterstand. Dat zou een volledig averechts effect zijn. Bij uitbreiding moet rekening worden gehouden met de wensen van de burgers van Europa als het gaat om hun eigen uitbreiding; er moet worden geluisterd naar hun stem. Als we dat niet doen, wordt de uitbreiding van de democratische en stabiele zone van Europa, wat de uiteindelijke doelstelling is, ondermijnd."@nl3
lpv:translated text
"Mr President, sometimes it is worth asking simple, even simplistic, questions: why enlarge the European Union at all? The simple answer is: in order to enlarge the zone of democracy and stability that Europe has created. However, the matter is more complex than appears at first sight. Democracy is not static, but demands constant improvement with the aim of empowering the people. This is what the deepening of integration is fundamentally about. It is in this context that enlargement raises a particular problem, and one that has to be tackled. The European Union insists that future Member States arrive with fully functioning democratic systems – as is proper – yet this overlooks the changes that enlargement brings in its wake within the EU itself. The problem is this: the entry of new Member States involves not just the states but the new citizens who are added through accession. Therefore, the enlargement of the European Union simultaneously means the enlargement of the European demos, the citizens of Europe. Their voice is seldom heard in the enlargement debate, yet leaving out the citizens threatens to exacerbate the democratic deficit. An EU beset by a democratic deficit cannot be fully effective in extending the zone of democracy to future Member States. On the contrary, it could even result in exporting the democratic deficit. That would be completely counterproductive. Enlargement must take the wishes of the citizens of Europe into account when it comes to their own enlargement, and not take their voice for granted. Failure to do so would undermine the goal of extending Europe’s zone of democracy and stability."@lv13
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata
"György Schöpflin (PPE-DE ). –"5,19,15,1,18,14,16,11,13,4
lpv:translated text
"Κύριε Πρόεδρε, ορισμένες φορές αξίζει να θέτουμε απλά, ακόμη και απλουστευτικά ερωτήματα: γιατί πρέπει οπωσδήποτε να διευρύνουμε την Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση; Η απλή απάντηση είναι: για να διευρύνουμε τη ζώνη δημοκρατίας και σταθερότητας την οποία έχει δημιουργήσει η Ευρώπη. Το θέμα, όμως, είναι πιο σύνθετο από ό,τι μπορεί να φαίνεται με μια πρώτη ματιά. Η δημοκρατία δεν είναι στατική· απαιτεί συνεχή βελτίωση με σκοπό την ενδυνάμωση των πολιτών. Αυτή είναι η πραγματική ουσία της εμβάθυνσης της διαδικασίας ολοκλήρωσης. Σε αυτό το πλαίσιο η διεύρυνση εγείρει ένα συγκεκριμένο πρόβλημα, το οποίο πρέπει να αντιμετωπίσουμε. Η Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση επιμένει ότι τα μελλοντικά κράτη μέλη πρέπει, κατά την ένταξή τους, να διαθέτουν πλήρως λειτουργικά δημοκρατικά συστήματα –κάτι που είναι σωστό– όμως έτσι παραγνωρίζονται οι αλλαγές που επιφέρει η διεύρυνση στο εσωτερικό της ίδιας της ΕΕ. Το πρόβλημα είναι το εξής: η είσοδος νέων κρατών μελών δεν οδηγεί στη συμμετοχή μόνο των κρατών, αλλά και των νέων πολιτών που προστίθενται μέσω της ένταξης. Συνεπώς, η διεύρυνση της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης συνεπάγεται ταυτοχρόνως τη διεύρυνση του ευρωπαϊκού δήμου, των πολιτών της Ευρώπης. Σπανίως λαμβάνονται υπόψη οι απόψεις τους στη συζήτηση για τη διεύρυνση· εντούτοις, η αποξένωσή τους δημιουργεί κίνδυνο επιδείνωσης του δημοκρατικού ελλείμματος. Μια ΕΕ η οποία πάσχει από δημοκρατικό έλλειμμα δεν μπορεί να επεκτείνει αποτελεσματικά τη ζώνη δημοκρατίας σε μελλοντικά κράτη μέλη. Απεναντίας, ενδέχεται ακόμη και να εξαγάγει αυτό το δημοκρατικό έλλειμμα, πράγμα που θα ήταν εντελώς αντιπαραγωγικό. Κατά τη διεύρυνση, πρέπει να λαμβάνονται υπόψη οι απόψεις των πολιτών της Ευρώπης για αυτήν τη διαδικασία και να μην θεωρείται δεδομένη η συναίνεσή τους. Διαφορετικά, υπονομεύεται ο στόχος της επέκτασης της ζώνης δημοκρατίας και σταθερότητας στην Ευρώπη."@el10
lpv:translated text
"Senhor Presidente, há momentos em que vale a pena fazer perguntas simples, e até mesmo simplistas: porquê alargar a União Europeia? A resposta simples é: para alargar o espaço de democracia e estabilidade que a Europa criou. No entanto, a questão é mais complexa do que parece à primeira vista. A democracia não é estática, antes exige uma melhoria constante a fim de dar poder ao povo. É basicamente isto que significa o aprofundamento da integração. É neste contexto que o alargamento suscita um problema específico, um problema que tem de ser resolvido. A União Europeia insiste em que os futuros Estados-Membros devem entrar já com sistemas democráticos totalmente funcionais – o que é pertinente – mas essa exigência ignora as alterações que o alargamento induz em seguida na própria UE. O problema é este: a entrada de novos Estados-Membros envolve não só os Estados mas também os novos cidadãos que a adesão traz consigo. Logo, o alargamento da União Europeia significa simultaneamente o alargamento do europeu, dos cidadãos da Europa. A sua voz raramente é ouvida no debate sobre o alargamento, apesar de a exclusão dos cidadãos encerrar um risco de agravamento do défice democrático. Uma UE acometida por um défice democrático não pode ser totalmente eficaz ao estender o espaço de democracia aos futuros Estados-Membros. Pelo contrário, pode até acabar por estar a exportar esse défice democrático, e isso seria totalmente contraproducente. O alargamento deve ter em consideração os desejos dos cidadãos da Europa, quando o que está em causa é o seu próprio alargamento, e não se deve tomar a sua voz como um dado adquirido. Caso contrário, está-se a comprometer o objectivo de ampliar o espaço de democracia e estabilidade da Europa."@pt17
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata
"demos"17,12
lpv:spoken text
"Mr President, sometimes it is worth asking simple, even simplistic, questions: why enlarge the European Union at all? The simple answer is: in order to enlarge the zone of democracy and stability that Europe has created. However, the matter is more complex than appears at first sight. Democracy is not static, but demands constant improvement with the aim of empowering the people. This is what the deepening of integration is fundamentally about. It is in this context that enlargement raises a particular problem, and one that has to be tackled. The European Union insists that future Member States arrive with fully functioning democratic systems – as is proper – yet this overlooks the changes that enlargement brings in its wake within the EU itself. The problem is this: the entry of new Member States involves not just the states but the new citizens who are added through accession. Therefore, the enlargement of the European Union simultaneously means the enlargement of the European demos, the citizens of Europe. Their voice is seldom heard in the enlargement debate, yet leaving out the citizens threatens to exacerbate the democratic deficit. An EU beset by a democratic deficit cannot be fully effective in extending the zone of democracy to future Member States. On the contrary, it could even result in exporting the democratic deficit. That would be completely counterproductive. Enlargement must take the wishes of the citizens of Europe into account when it comes to their own enlargement, and not take their voice for granted. Failure to do so would undermine the goal of extending Europe’s zone of democracy and stability."@en4
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata
"György Schöpflin (PPE-DE ). –"5,19,15,1,18,14,16,11,13,4
lpv:translated text
"Señor Presidente, a veces merece la pena plantearse preguntas sencillas, incluso simples: ¿Por qué ampliar la Unión Europea? La respuesta es sencilla: para ampliar el espacio de democracia y estabilidad que Europa ha creado. Sin embargo, la cuestión es más compleja de lo que parece a primera vista. La democracia no es estática, pero exige mejoras constantes con el objetivo de capacitar a los ciudadanos. De esto es lo que trata básicamente la profundización de la integración. Es en este contexto donde la ampliación presenta un problema particular y uno que tiene que ser abordado. La Unión Europea insiste en que los futuros Estados miembros lleguen con sistemas democráticos plenamente operativos –como es debido–, pero pasa por alto los cambios que la ampliación conlleva dentro de la propia UE. El problema es este: la entrada de nuevos Estados miembros afecta no solo a los Estados, sino a los nuevos ciudadanos que se añaden mediante la adhesión. Por tanto, la ampliación de la Unión Europea significa, al mismo tiempo, la ampliación de pueblos, los ciudadanos de Europa. Su voz rara vez se oye en el debate de la ampliación, y si dejamos de lado a los ciudadanos corremos el peligro de exacerbar el déficit democrático. Una UE acosada por un déficit democrático no puede ser plenamente eficaz a la hora de ampliar el espacio de democracia a los futuros Estados miembros. Por el contrario, podría incluso resultar en la exportación del déficit democrático. Esto sería completamente contraproducente. La ampliación debe tener en cuenta los deseos de los ciudadanos de Europa al proceder a de su propia ampliación, y no dar por sentadas sus opiniones. Si no lo hacemos, socavaremos el objetivo de ampliar el espacio de democracia y estabilidad de Europa."@es20
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata
"demos"17,12
lpv:translated text
"Herr Präsident! Manchmal ist es durchaus sinnvoll, einfache oder sogar zu einfache Fragen zu stellen: Warum muss denn die Europäische Union überhaupt erweitert werden? Die einfache Antwort darauf lautet, um den Raum der Demokratie und Stabilität zu erweitern, den Europa geschaffen hat. Doch das Thema ist komplexer, als es auf den ersten Blick erscheinen mag. Demokratie ist nichts Statisches, sie erfordert vielmehr eine kontinuierliche Verbesserung mit dem Ziel, das Volk an politischen Prozessen zu beteiligen. Darum geht es bei der Vertiefung der Integration in erster Linie. In diesem Zusammenhang wirft die Erweiterung ein ganz spezielles Problem auf, mit dem wir uns befassen müssen. Die Europäische Union schreibt – zu Recht – vor, dass künftige Mitgliedstaaten zum Zeitpunkt des Beitritts über voll funktionsfähige demokratische Systeme verfügen müssen, übersieht dabei aber die Änderungen innerhalb der EU selbst, die die Erweiterung unmittelbar mit sich bringt. Das Problem besteht darin, dass der Beitritt neuer Mitgliedstaaten nicht nur die Aufnahme von Staaten, sondern auch von neuen Bürgern einschließt, die auf diese Weise Teil der Europäischen Union werden. Deshalb bedeutet die Erweiterung der Europäischen Union gleichzeitig die Erweiterung des europäischen Demos, der Bürger Europas. Ihre Stimme wird in der Erweiterungsdebatte nur selten gehört, aber wenn die Bürger nicht einbezogen werden, besteht die Gefahr, dass sich das demokratische Defizit noch weiter vergrößert. Eine EU, die unter einem Demokratiedefizit leidet, ist nur eingeschränkt dazu in der Lage, den Raum der Demokratie auf künftige Mitgliedstaaten auszuweiten. Vielmehr könnte das Gegenteil der Fall sein, das heißt, sie könnte das eigene Demokratiedefizit exportieren. Das wäre in jeder Hinsicht kontraproduktiv. Bei der Erweiterung müssen die Wünsche der Bürger Europas berücksichtigt werden, wenn es um ihre eigene Erweiterung geht, und ihre Zustimmung darf nicht vorausgesetzt werden. Wenn wir dies nicht beachten, könnte es negative Auswirkungen auf Ziel haben, Europas Raum der Demokratie und Stabilität auszuweiten."@de9
lpv:translated text
"Monsieur le Président, parfois il est bon de poser des questions simples, voire simplistes: pourquoi élargir l’Union européenne au fond? La réponse est simple: pour élargir la zone de démocratie et de stabilité que l’Europe a créée. Cependant, la question est plus complexe qu’il n’y paraît à première vue. La démocratie n’est pas immuable, elle nécessite des améliorations constantes dans le but de donner le pouvoir aux citoyens. C’est la raison fondamentale du renforcement de l’intégration. C’est dans ce contexte que l’élargissement soulève un problème particulier qui doit être réglé. L’Union européenne insiste pour que les futurs États membres arrivent avec des systèmes démocratiques en parfait état de marche - comme il se doit -, mais cette exigence ne tient pas compte des changements que l’élargissement entraîne dans son sillage au sein même de l’UE. Le problème est le suivant: l’entrée de nouveaux États membres concerne non seulement les États, mais également les nouveaux citoyens qui s’ajoutent par le biais de l’adhésion. Par conséquent, l’élargissement de l’Union européenne implique l’élargissement de la démographie européenne, l’augmentation des citoyens de l’Europe. Leur voix est rarement entendue dans le débat de l’élargissement, pourtant, ignorer les citoyens risque d’exacerber le déficit démocratique. Une UE assaillie par un déficit démocratique ne peut pas efficacement étendre la zone de démocratie aux futurs États membres. Au contraire, le déficit démocratique pourrait même s’exporter. Cela serait complètement contre-productif. L’élargissement doit prendre en considération les souhaits des citoyens européens en ce qui concerne leur propre élargissement et ne doit pas prendre leur voix pour acquise. Faute de quoi, cela nuirait à l’objectif d’expansion de la zone de démocratie et de stabilité de l’Europe."@fr8
lpv:translated text
"Signor Presidente, a volte merita porsi questioni semplici, persino semplicistiche: perché allargare l’Unione europea? La semplice risposta è: per allargare la zona di democrazia e stabilità creata dall’Europa. Tuttavia, la questione è più complessa di quanto non sembri a prima vista. La democrazia non è statica, richiede miglioramenti costanti, al fine di conferire potere alle persone. Questo è lo scopo fondamentale dell’approfondimento dell’integrazione. In questo contesto, l’allargamento solleva un problema specifico, che deve essere affrontato. L’Unione europea insiste sulla necessità che i futuri Stati membri giungano all’adesione con sistemi democratici pienamente funzionanti – come si conviene –, ma in tal modo si trascurano i cambiamenti che l’allargamento comporta all’interno dell’Unione stessa. Il problema è che l’adesione di nuovi Stati membri non riguarda soltanto gli Stati ma anche i nuovi cittadini che si aggiungono tramite l’adesione. Di conseguenza, l’allargamento dell’Unione europea significa anche l’allargamento del europeo, dei cittadini d’Europa. La loro voce è raramente ascoltata nel dibattito sull’allargamento, anche se escludendo i cittadini si rischia di esacerbare il democratico. Un’Unione afflitta da un democratico non può essere pienamente efficace nell’allargare la zona della democrazia a futuri Stati membri. Al contrario, potrebbe persino finire per esportare il democratico, il che sarebbe del tutto controproducente. L’allargamento deve tenere conto dei desideri dei cittadini d’Europa, dal momento che si tratta del loro stesso allargamento, e non deve dare per scontato il loro parere. Agire altrimenti significa compromettere l’obiettivo di ampliare la zona europea di democrazia e stabilità."@it12
rdf:type
dcterms:Date
dcterms:Is Part Of
dcterms:Language
lpv:document identification number
"en.20061213.4.3-039"6
lpv:hasSubsequent
lpv:speaker

Named graphs describing this resource:

1http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/Czech.ttl.gz
2http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/Danish.ttl.gz
3http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/Dutch.ttl.gz
4http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/English.ttl.gz
5http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/Estonian.ttl.gz
6http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/Events_and_structure.ttl.gz
7http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/Finnish.ttl.gz
8http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/French.ttl.gz
9http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/German.ttl.gz
10http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/Greek.ttl.gz
11http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/Hungarian.ttl.gz
12http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/Italian.ttl.gz
13http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/Latvian.ttl.gz
14http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/Lithuanian.ttl.gz
15http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/Maltese.ttl.gz
16http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/Polish.ttl.gz
17http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/Portuguese.ttl.gz
18http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/Slovak.ttl.gz
19http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/Slovenian.ttl.gz
20http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/Spanish.ttl.gz
21http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/Swedish.ttl.gz
22http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/spokenAs.ttl.gz

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph