Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-11-19-Speech-2-112"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20021119.2.2-112"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Mr President, much work has been achieved in recent weeks to accelerate the enlargement process, but a number of difficulties have to be overcome before EU enlargement becomes a practical reality. We must not underestimate the challenges we face in the run-up to the accession of the ten countries to the European Union.
The EU Convention must remember that many candidate countries are due to hold referenda on EU accession. We should make this as uncomplicated as possible for the people of the candidate countries. That is where the EU Convention could be running into trouble: it is going too far ahead of the peoples of Europe. Are we seriously asking the candidate countries to ratify the Accession Treaty by referenda next year only to ask them a year later to ratify another EU treaty on more changes to the day-to-day operation of the Union? What would the people of the candidate countries be basing their decision in next year's referenda on? On the existing EU Treaties – including the recently ratified Treaty of Nice – or on an array of new proposals from the EU Convention? Have we not learnt anything from the recent referendum on the Treaty of Nice in Ireland? The Treaty was fairly modest by any standards, but it was very difficult to explain the issues to the people. We succeeded in part the second time round in explaining the Treaty, but the lack of understanding of EU issues is still prevalent.
However, some people at the EU Convention are rushing ahead with extensive reform in all matters connected with the day-to-day operation of the Union. We are presenting conflicting messages and proposals to the people of the candidate countries. In fact I would go further and say that the EU Convention runs the risk of blurring the enlargement process. I must remind the House and members of the Convention that the Convention is a consultative process – the real decisions should and must be made by the Council of Ministers.
Let us not underestimate the amount of work which must be completed before enlargement becomes a working success. The candidate countries must implement the full range of EU directives and regulations. The enlargement negotiations are broken up into 38 different chapters. It is going to take the candidate countries time to implement this full body of legislation. We all know that the accession of ten new countries is not an easy task. The pace of reform is the main issue. Diplomats and politicians cannot be allowed to run too far ahead of the people of Europe on the issue of future developments. We need to bring the people of Europe with us at each stage and we cannot take their support for granted.
From an Irish perspective, any future EU Treaty that appears to supersede the Irish Constitution will be extremely difficult – if not impossible – to sell to the Irish people. Any proposals that diminish the representation of small Member States within the EU institutions will fly in the face of the principles of equality that are the stated aims of the European Union."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples