Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2007-05-22-Speech-2-206"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20070522.23.2-206"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Ladies and gentlemen, the European Constitution was supposed to strengthen the Union as a player on the world stage, but what has actually happened? What appeared was an incomprehensible document, the adoption of which was not an issue for the social engineers who created it. The citizens of two countries have given a resounding ‘no’. The document is also iniquitous, and has for a number of years been diverting the attention of politicians from more pressing problems. It introduces unnecessary conflict within the Union and confirms the suspicion that the Union is a petty concern; not geographically speaking, but in terms of the outlook of its leaders, who are incapable of accepting the failure of this project and of proposing a different one to the public. Heads of State prefer to tiptoe around the subject rather than to admit openly that in Rome three years ago they signed a document which public opinion has since rejected. This is a blind alley and we must find a different way forward.
It is not the future of Europe as a global player that will be put in jeopardy by the failure to adopt the Constitution. What does jeopardise it is the remoteness of politicians from real life and the pointless discussions over a dead text. The citizens of the Member States understand less and less the language of the European institutions and their representatives. Our global partners, moreover, will seek to exploit the EU’s lack of unity and the vanity of its leaders.
I firmly believe that the EU needs to reform its institutions and that it needs a new unifying document that would clearly demarcate the scope of authority of the Union and the Member States. We need a Treaty that is concise, comprehensible and fair, and thus acceptable to our citizens, as well as being, most importantly, a Treaty that is something other that just an amended or trimmed down version of the rejected Constitution. I believe that policies on pensions, tax, health, social matters, culture, justice and nuclear energy should remain in the hands of the Member States. Other policy areas must be subject to discussion. Some of us, in both political and normal life, have experienced failure, and this has now happened to the champions of the European Constitution. They should overcome their stubbornness and admit defeat. They should also begin negotiations over a new Treaty at the earliest opportunity. I expect a realistic approach of this kind from the June summit and from the German and Portuguese Presidencies. Only this way will we increase trust in the European project, both among EU citizens and on the wider global economic and political stage."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples