Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2012-09-12-Speech-3-109-750"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20120912.4.3-109-750"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"President Barroso’s speech today called for further integration, unified economic and financial management, a new European treaty and a federation of nation states. Although he used the term ̔̔federation of nation states’, what he has in mind is to further strengthen the EU institutions and deprive nation states of their powers. The theory of optimum currency areas explains very well when a single currency creates economic benefit. However, the introduction of the euro was not based on rational assumptions, but rather on political hopes – the hope that a single currency would pave the way for a single European state. We can see now that the euro project does not work and – like a condemned man – it is waiting for the execution of its sentence. As long as there are distinctive nations, cultures, languages and societies in Europe, it cannot succeed. The euro crisis is therefore not only an economic crisis. It symbolises the crisis of the entire concept of a federal Europe. So, is further integration the right way forward? No. We should take a step back. If we are already thinking about a new treaty, then we should go back to the Treaty of Nice. We should restrict the powers of the EU and delegate responsibility to national governments. We need cooperation between states in Europe, and not one state managed from Brussels. Further federalisation of Europe will strengthen the strong centres and marginalise the weak, creating a two-speed Europe, a continent of losers and winners. If we consider the shape of the crisis, we can easily identify the losers."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples