Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-05-30-Speech-3-093"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2001-05-30"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Treaty of Nice and the future of the EU2
dcterms:Language	"pt"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20010530.5.3-093"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2001-05-30-Speech-3-0942
lpv:speaker	lp:Ilda Figueiredo2
lpv:spokenAs	substitute; Committee on Women's Rights and Equal Opportunities (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 member; EMPL (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 unknown; Partido Comunista Português (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 member; Delegation for relations with the Mashreq countries and the Gulf (1999-09-29--2002-01-14)3 substitute; AGRI (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 member; EUL/NGL (1999-07-20--2002-03-05)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, I disagree with this report for three basic reasons. The first concerns its view of the Treaty of Nice’s content. It adopts an uncompromising approach in its criticism of the positions that were adopted there, considering them to be timid and inadequate, when what it should have done was criticise the steps towards federalism, which threaten the fundamental interests of some current and future Member States, since the applicant countries could not take part in a process of decision making on changes that will affect them. It is also unacceptable for the European Parliament to criticise the position taken in Nice on increasing the number of MEPs in order to ensure a more pluralist composition following enlargement, although it then tries to achieve some fairness with regard to the number of representatives from Hungary and the Czech Republic. The lowest possible number! My second point of disagreement concerns speeding up the process of preparing the new Treaty when the Treaty of Nice has not even been ratified by the Member States’ national Parliaments. It is unacceptable to insist on a proposal that seeks to make rapid progress on revising the Treaty in order to conclude it by the end of 2003 without even guaranteeing participation on an equal footing for the applicant countries. My third point of disagreement concerns the method that has been laid down for following up the proposal to draft the Charter. This method excludes the participation of parties with different political views, which threatens the pluralism and the genuinely independent and democratic participation of national parliaments."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph