Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-12-18-Speech-3-030"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20021218.3.3-030"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Madam President, one of the great disadvantages of this Parliament is that it is never short of superlatives when it comes to heaping praise upon the presidencies that take place in this regular six-monthly cycle. The disadvantage is that when we really have some genuine praise to give, it does not come with the force that is deserved. For my part, Mr Rasmussen has been an outstanding President of the Council. I would like, on behalf of my party, to congratulate him, coming from – and here I adopt what our President said – not one of the largest European countries. I had said smallest but I obey the President's edict on this. I am bound to say too that my own prime minister may have some personal aspirations for the presidency of the Council if it works on a five-yearly cycle, but I very much hope that Mr Rasmussen has now entered the field in that regard.
It is quite right that reference was made to the visionary words of Pope John Paul many years ago. I want to make some reference to Margaret Thatcher's own words at Bruges. These words have sadly become synonymous with euroscepticism, but the real message that Margaret Thatcher gave at Bruges was about a wider Europe. In those circumstances her message about Europe not becoming so inward-looking is one that has been carried forward by Mr Rasmussen and is one that we all celebrate today.
I also endorse the remarks of Mr Verheugen. I distance myself from what Mr Abitbol had to say about him because he was quite right in talking about the moral obligation that we have to candidate countries, about the fact that democracy and human rights are the battle that these countries have taken forward. Sometimes we adopt too much of a patronising attitude towards these candidate countries. We have to recognise that both Parliament and peoples will need to ratify entry.
I hope we learn the lesson of Nice. That is a message for all of us here. The élites within Europe do not recognise that we have to treat these countries with the respect that they deserve, not only because we want them to vote positively on entry, but because the institutions that we have must become more accountable and more responsive. That is what the Convention is supposed to be all about. We have a structured design for six countries which is now difficult to operate on the basis of 15 countries and which shortly will be a mechanism that will have to serve the interests of 25 countries. The Convention should not become tied down in a debate covering only institutional matters, but must shift its focus to demonstrate how Europe can become a much more accountable and responsive institution for the future."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples