Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-09-05-Speech-2-088"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20000905.7.2-088"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, I believe it is important not to lose sight of the objectives pursued in the course of this debate. In my opinion, there are two:
Firstly, to guarantee more effective, coherent and visible external action on the part of the European Union. What would be the point of having more than 40 000 officials in more than 1 500 diplomatic missions between the Commission and the Member States – twice the number the United States has – if our activity really is not sufficiently efficient, coherent or visible? I believe that Mr Patten expressed this very well in his intervention when he demonstrated that he had at least read the joint motion for a resolution which we have negotiated in Parliament.
Secondly, to take note of the fact that the days when the European Parliament simply rubber-stamped the priorities established by other Community institutions have finally been assigned to history.
Mr Moscovici, in the coming months we will have to make important decisions in the field of the nascent, embryonic defence policy. During the Balkan crisis the inadequacies of the European Union were made blatantly clear. In the United States there is currently a great debate taking place concerning defence expenditure. We will soon have to hold this debate here in Europe. We in Europe will not only have to consider this expenditure but also the structure of this spending.
The incompatibility and heterogeneity of the Member States’ investments in this field – the national views – make this such a difficult debate that we will have to consider other added problems such as interinstitutional disputes. This Parliament would clearly have preferred the figure of the High Representative to be answerable to the Commission. Instead, it has been answerable to the Council , and this is something we have to accept, as we also have to accept that the Commission must play a role. Mr Patten is right when he says that we have to clarify and resolve a series of tensions between the intergovernmental realm and the Community realm. This dispute between the institutions must be resolved, and the European Parliament must not simply be serving at the table, but it also wishes to take its place in the kitchen."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples