Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-05-30-Speech-3-089"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2001-05-30"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Treaty of Nice and the future of the EU2
dcterms:Language	"de"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20010530.5.3-089"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2001-05-30-Speech-3-0902
lpv:speaker	lp:Ursula Schleicher2
lpv:spokenAs	substitute; Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 unknown; Christlich-Soziale Union in Bayern e.V. (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 chair; Delegations to the parliamentary cooperation committees for relations with Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia (1999-07-22--2002-01-14)3 vice-chair; AFCO (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 member; Conference of Delegation Chairs (1999-07-22--2002-01-14)3 member_of_the_bureau; EPP-ED (1999-10-12--2002-03-07)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, the two rapporteurs, Iñigo Méndez de Vigo and António José Seguro, took on the difficult task of evaluating the results of the Nice Government Summit in December 2000 without hurting anyone while at the same time setting our sights for the future and expressing the hopes and demands of the European Parliament. They deserve our sincere thanks. Political closeness to the governments in the home countries obviously plays some part in the evaluation of the results of Nice. Whether the practice of appointing two rapporteurs from different groups will still be meaningful for the European Parliament in the future needs to be looked at carefully. As Vice-Chairman of the Committee on Constitutional Affairs, I should have liked the language to have been clearer. I know that large parts of the PPE-DE Group and not only my German colleagues agree with me. In our view, the results of Nice are not sufficient to create the institutional conditions for enlargement. We regret that precisely because we want enlargement and want it as quickly as possible. We have reservations in particular about the complicated voting procedure in the Council of Ministers, but also about the number of MPs and the composition of the European Parliament; that this should not be settled until 2009 is completely unsatisfactory, will create legal problems in the meantime, create injustices for some candidate countries and also cement the continuing democratic deficit because it fails to link the codecision process to majority voting in the Council of Ministers. Nice set out four topics for the new Intergovernmental Conference, of which the definition of competences is of the utmost importance for us and must be settled before the first accessions. Unfortunately, the draft repeatedly speaks of a constitution. I want to argue here for the clear legal concept of a constitutional treaty. Lastly and most important of all: the forthcoming Intergovernmental Conference must not only be prepared for more carefully, it must be over by the end of 2003, and that means that the way must be definitively paved in the form of the convention, timetable and content by the time of the European Council in Laeken at the end of 2001 at the latest."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph