Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2007-06-06-Speech-3-033"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20070606.12.3-033"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Madam President, in the report by our fellow Members, Mr Barón Crespo and Mr Brok, we read, in recital H, with regards to the French and Dutch rejection of the draft Constitutional Treaty, the following words: ‘many of the misgivings expressed related to the context, rather than the content, and the issues of major public concern have since been resolved’. That is what is called reassuring oneself on the cheap. The conclusion from such a diagnosis is obvious. It is stated in the first paragraph and I quote: ‘reaffirms its endorsement of the content of the Constitutional Treaty’.
Of course, the report intends to take into account the difficulties that have arisen in certain Member States, but paragraph 6 makes abundantly clear the extent of the concessions that it could agree to when it reaffirms, and I quote, ‘its commitment to achieving a settlement of the ongoing constitutional process of the European Union, that is based on the content of the Constitutional Treaty, possibly under a different presentation’. The similarity of this approach to that suggested in one of the 12 questions that Mrs Merkel addressed last month to the Heads of State or Government is striking. Remember, I quote: ‘what do you think about the proposal to change the wording without changing the substance?’
These three extracts from Mr Barón Crespo and Mr Brok’s report sum up perfectly the reasons for my group’s disagreement with the text proposed to us. It is no service to Europe to hide from the increasing problems raised by a fundamental part of the
among our citizens, that is, some of the implications of what our Treaties call the open market economy where competition is free.
Three examples: on 22 May last, at the congress of the European Trade Union Confederation, the President of the European Central Bank, Mr Trichet, was able to confirm the truth of this to his cost when his argument for pay restraint in the name of price competitiveness in an open economy was unanimously rejected. A few days earlier, Mr McCreevy, the Commissioner, had a similar experience, this time at the Council, where more and more government representatives asked for privatisation of postal services to be postponed in view of the general public outcry aroused by this draft directive. There again, also, a few days ago, 10 industrial associations that are very vulnerable to global competition accused the Commissioner, Mr Mandelson, of showing free trade zeal with, I quote, ‘unacceptable consequences’.
It is, no doubt, this avalanche of protests that the German Minister for the Economy and Finance, Mr Steinbrück, must have had in mind when he spoke recently of, I quote, ‘a risk of the European economic and social model suffering a crisis of legitimacy’. That is why my group is arguing resolutely in favour of, first of all, a very open public debate about what needs to change in the orientation and structures of the Union, and then for a ratification of the future European Treaty by means of a referendum."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples