Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-11-19-Speech-3-037"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20031119.1.3-037"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, I would like to start by thanking you for the requests that you have made in the context of this debate and to say, as I have done on other occasions, that we consider them precious contributions to the work that the Presidency is doing in order to reach an objective that I think could be considered – judging by what has been said in the overwhelming majority of speeches by the Members of the European Parliament – of common interest.
As regards the specific issues, quite frankly, I believe that today's speeches have retraced our debate of last week, so there have been no new developments and I can only reiterate in exactly the same way some points upon which I have already given my response. The Italian Presidency does not accept any intervention from Ecofin – to be quite clear and specific on an issue that you have raised – since it believes that no Council, not even Ecofin, is entitled to present amendments. If a representative of the Intergovernmental Conference wishes to table proposals which might also emerge from the Ecofin debate, it will do so on behalf of the government that it represents but not on behalf of Ecofin. I believe, therefore, that, from this point of view, my answer must be the same as that I gave in the past meeting.
As regards our commitment to safeguarding the fundamental role of the European Parliament, and of parliaments in general, I continue to stress that we believe this to be an essential point. On a more general note, as regards the issue of whether proposals made by governments can be discussed, I have to say that it is difficult to imagine the Presidency totally and absolutely refusing to consider proposals that governments may wish to present. Frankly, I do not believe that is possible. Moreover, it is not as if your representatives – the representatives of the European Parliament to the Intergovernmental Conference – acted any differently from the Presidency; it is not as if the two representatives had got up and walked out because some governments wanted to reopen the debate on issues already discussed in the Convention. This is a phase of negotiation – I reiterate to Mr Napolitano – that I frankly believe to be normal and natural. I cannot see how else we could proceed.
Rather, I want to stress that the work you are doing in support of our undertaking not to depart from the spirit and from the recommendations that emerged from the work of the Convention is fundamental. Surely, however, it cannot be imagined that the Intergovernmental Conference is meeting simply to ratify work that has already been completed, valuable and important though that work is, which some governments clearly feel could be improved upon. The IGC is proceeding in this direction and I genuinely hope that, with everyone's efforts, we will be able to achieve that important, valuable result which, I repeat, is a legacy we all share."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples