Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-01-12-Speech-3-103"
Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
---|---|
rdf:type | |
dcterms:Date | |
dcterms:Is Part Of | |
dcterms:Language | |
lpv:document identification number |
"en.20050112.6.3-103"2
|
lpv:hasSubsequent | |
lpv:speaker | |
lpv:spokenAs | |
lpv:translated text |
".
If it were left to the Greens, the draft Constitution would be a good deal more ambitious than the one we have been presented with. It would enable us to give practical form to the political, social and ecological Europe that we advocate. Such a draft would be without ambiguities or uncertainties as to its objectives; it would not have this third part which, doing nothing more than recapitulating previous treaties, is in contradiction to a global and ambitious project for Europe. Despite its imperfections, I shall be voting in favour of the draft Constitution, and I urge others to do likewise, for it would be a great aberration and major political error to go over to the ‘no’ camp simply because the final document is not equal to the demands made of it.
More than ever, we need Europe, imperfect though it may be.
A Constitution will enable us to launch this peaceful Europe as the custodian of such shared values as human rights and democracy. This great act will enable the European public to feel themselves united in a truly common design. The ‘yes’ I shall say by voting in favour of the Corbett report is the ‘yes’ of a militant.
To fail in this historic moment would be to negate our own labour as builders of Europe and would for a considerable time put the brakes on the ambitious development of the European project that we wish to see …"@en1
|
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples