Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-09-03-Speech-3-033"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20030903.2.3-033"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, a few weeks before the Convention began its work, when Mr Klaus Hänsch and I visited the President of the Convention in his house in Paris, after we had left that meeting I noted in my diary, ‘We will be successful if we manage to create the spirit of the Convention’.
I believe that the political work of this European Parliament today, the political message we have to send is that we are becoming guardians of this Constitution. This Constitution is one which this Parliament believes to be good for Europe and for its citizens. I therefore believe that our political message should be to become the guardians of this Constitution.
To this end, Mr President, we must play an active part in the Intergovernmental Conference. And I am glad that Mr Fini, who is also imbued with that Convention spirit, has said that the presence of the European Parliament will be real. We do not want it to be ceremonial, we do not simply want to take lunch in Rome, although Rome is a wonderful city. What we want to do is to continue bringing our ideas and our impetus to this Intergovernmental Conference.
Mr President, it has been an honour to chair the delegation of the European Parliament, it has certainly been one of the most wonderful adventures, without doubt the most wonderful of my political life, but above all I would like to say here today in this House that I believe that in the end the great beneficiaries will be the citizens of Europe.
What did we understand by ‘the spirit of the Convention’? We meant ensuring that the members of the Convention were aware of the historic importance of the moment, of the difficulty of the challenge and of the will to rethink Europe in accordance with what was best for the citizens in the new Europe following the great enlargement.
I believe that in the creation of that Convention spirit, which has been the key to this success, you have played a leading role, Mr President. I believe that the applause following your speech today demonstrates that this Parliament has appreciated your work at the head of this Convention.
Why in this task of rethinking Europe was it so necessary to convince ourselves of its difficulty? I believe that what we have carried out is an exercise in realising those slogans which this European Parliament has had since the 1990s: more democracy, more efficiency and more transparency.
I believe that this Constitution is more democratic, more efficient and more transparent. It creates a Europe which is also imbued with these ideas. Why? Because we have modified the institutional system. It is true that we have done so, but we have done so precisely in order to provide the European Union with greater democracy.
We only have to remember and compare the model of the ECSC Treaty; we only have to remember what that assembly was, that predecessor of this Parliament in the ECSC Treaty. Today this Parliament, with this Constitution, is a fully democratic Parliament, fully integrated into the decision-making process. But we have also managed to integrate the national Parliaments into this decision-making process. And we have also ensured that the citizens can activate popular initiative when the law so establishes.
This idea of more democracy is reflected in the Constitution. Also the idea of more efficiency – and that is why we have modified the institutional system. We have modified it profoundly. I believe we have always borne in mind the idea of safeguarding the necessary balance between the institutions, that that has been the fundamental premise of all our work. The truth is that only time will tell whether we have achieved that or not. But I believe that, in the modifications we have introduced, the idea of preserving the balance was absolutely essential.
Our work has ended. Now we have the Intergovernmental Conference. I believe that to criticise the Constitution – to say that it should have been done this way or that – is the work of experts and professors, but I do not believe it is the work of the European Parliament. The work of the European Parliament is to take a political position with regard to the Constitution. We are going to do so in the report for which our fellow Members, Mr Gil Robles and Mr Tsatsos, are rapporteurs.
I believe, Mr President, that you have presented the European Parliament with a challenge today. I remember that in the twenties there was a debate in Germany on the guardian of the Constitution between Carl Schmitt and Hans Kelsen:
[The guardian of the Constitution. Who should the guardian of the Constitution be?]"@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
"Der Hüter der Verfassung."1
"Wer soll der Hüter der Verfassung sein?"1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples