Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-05-16-Speech-2-020"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20060516.4.2-020"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, Commissioner, I fully support what you said today, and I know how committed you are to Plan D. However, what you said today about the Constitution is not in the papers. I am talking in particular about the citizens' agenda. I therefore share the criticisms made by Mr Schulz and many others that, reading these papers, one gets the impression that the Commission has given up on fighting for the Constitution. I think that is a great shame, because you have severely disappointed not only many citizens who have also fought for the Constitution – for example in the referendums. That really is worthy of criticism. There are two major deficits to which you barely refer in this paper. The first is the institutional deficit: this could be dealt with through the Constitution, and I agree with Mr Méndez de Vigo that the costs of not having the Constitution have not been stated. The second deficit relates to the lack of financial resources. That, too, has barely been mentioned.
I now come to my main problem. I agree with you, Mrs Wallström, that it is absolutely vital not just to wait and to fight for the Constitution and for better funding, but also to take action now. I am referring in particular to the problem of unemployment. You have said some very pretty things here, with which I can agree, but where are the concrete proposals in addition to what we have discussed in the past with respect to Lisbon and so on? Where are the concrete proposals regarding, for example, coordination in economic policy, which is absolutely vital, especially in the euro area but also outside it, in order to create better economic conditions?
The President of the Commission has agreed to make an effort to ensure that public investment in infrastructure is better coordinated, because we do not have enough money to fund everything from Europe and much will have to be funded at national level. None of this is in the papers, though. If I may turn to energy policy, we have discussed the fact that, independent of the Constitution – which also gave Europe more competences in energy policy – we need to take some significant steps, particularly with regard to infrastructure. None of this is set out specifically in the papers on the table. It is a similar case for foreign and security policy, in which it can be said, on the one hand, that we need to go as far as we can without Constitution, but also that it is very important to have a Constitution so that we can go still further.
You call for a European response to globalisation, but in this respect too there are far too few indications of what this European response could look like, in order to develop a European social model whilst at the same time pushing forward with modernisation and keeping up with the competition. That, too, is a citizens' agenda, and it is precisely what many of the citizens expect from us. Therefore, I would ask you once again to clarify the Commission's attitude towards the Constitution. We must not just stand still; I am absolutely in favour of taking appropriate steps in parallel with that. However, do not neglect the institutional conditions, because you will disappoint the citizens if you do not clearly say to them that a Constitution is also necessary so that their interests can be implemented globally."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples