Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-12-17-Speech-2-110"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20021217.3.2-110"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
In the minority opinion annexed to the Bourlanges report, I criticised, in particular, the proposal in paragraph 5 to allow the Treaties to be revised by majority vote, albeit an extremely qualified majority vote, instead of unanimously. Taking Europe further along its current path, this method would distance the Member States from the European decision-making process.
One of our Luxemburgish fellow Members, Mr Poos, former Foreign Affairs Minister for his country, and former President-in-Office of the Council of the European Union, has written to Mr Bourlanges to tell him this. Stating ‘that no Member State will agree to a change to fundamental law being imposed on them against their will’, he adds: ‘the citizens of States thus made a minority will reject a Europe with vague authoritarian ideas. As many successive constitutional changes are made, an increasing number of Member States could be reduced to the status of vassal states. We can imagine the result in terms of adhesion to the Community project’.
In the end, the adopted resolution contained a more vague passage on this point, but the intent remains. In any case, the spirit of this proposal is more widely present in the idea of the report (and the Convention) to make codecision with a qualified majority in the Council the rule, without counterbalancing it with any national veto system."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples