Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2008-04-21-Speech-1-078"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20080421.14.1-078"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, I want to begin by strongly supporting the words of the rapporteur and also by appealing to Parliament’s specialist committees really to concentrate on projects with European added value when it comes to what I hope will be prompt consideration of the pilot projects and preparatory actions.
Addressing the Commission and the Council, let me add that in the course of the debate we finally want an answer to the question how we can at last restore health to our foreign and security policy that is suffering from several years of chronic under-funding, to bring an end to the annual disputes in this area that benefit nobody and are also damaging to the Commission and the Council.
The Commissioner said she would respond to the outcome of Bali in the preliminary draft budget, along the lines of formulating a new Asia strategy. But I would like to know when the Commission intends to present proposals on the budgetary implications of the Reform treaty, for the period up to 2013. Or are we supposed to wait for the next financial programming period? After all, we are concerned here with new aspects of immigration policy, climate change, energy policy, judicial cooperation and foreign and security policy. We have heard nothing on those subjects.
Let me add that as part of this budgetary procedure we must create the framework for implementing the new treaty once it has been ratified, which means that we must – proceeding with due care and sensitivity – take account of the need to adjust the agreements, in relation both to the ratification process and to the legal basis. That is most important. There are three aspects here. Where do we need preliminary agreements to ensure the appropriate transition from the old to the new treaty? Where do we need transitional agreements to ensure legal certainty? And where do we need a little more time to get subsequent agreements underway on the basis of the necessary legislative procedures?
I want to make it quite clear – to the forthcoming French Presidency too – that any agreements we can reach in regard to those three aspects will depend on the results, and we must retain a degree of flexibility so that we do not set everything in stone from the outset and then have to break it up again with a sledge-hammer."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples