Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-06-23-Speech-4-114"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20050623.30.4-114"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, I, too, have voted against the Members’ Statute, which I regard as sending the wrong message – that is what we are doing if we adopt it in such haste while the current European crisis is raging around us. I also feel that it rather amounts to a load of eyewash, and to putting wine in old bottles, as I cannot see much of a difference in comparison to the draft with which the Rothley report presented us.
There has been a lot of talk in the past few days about the setting up of citizens’ forums to address the crisis situation in Europe. Why are we not setting up citizens’ forums to discuss the Members’ Statute? Why is there no consultation on the Internet? If we can have a pause for reflection during the process of ratifying the Constitution, why can we not have a pause for reflection on the Members’ Statute? I still do not think it right that it should be combined with travel expenses. These things can be dealt with separately; for that we do not need this Members’ Statute to be adopted so over-hastily and in such a headlong rush.
I would, though, ask for a vote to be corrected. I am of course in favour of not reducing the retirement age. That, too, is something there is no way we can get across to the public at a time of austerity measures and cutbacks in the social budget. I think we have done Europe a disservice today, and I do not believe that we will, in so doing, be able to rid people of their suspicions of the European institutions and of their weariness with our politics."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples