natgillin/translations-raw huggingface dataset:
The signatories to the Treaty of Nice, being aware of its imperfections, in fact annexed to it a Declaration No 23 'on the future of the Union'
The signatories to the Treaty of Nice, being aware of its imperfections, in fact annexed to it a Declaration No 23 'on the future of the Union'
This reform was to be prepared for by 'wide-ranging discussions with all interested parties: representatives of national parliaments and all those reflecting public opinion (...) representatives of civil society, etc.', which was to take place in 2001 with a view to the adoption of a declaration 'containing appropriate initiatives for the continuation of this process' at the European Council in Laeken.
This reform was to be prepared for by 'wide-ranging discussions with all interested parties: representatives of national parliaments and all those reflecting public opinion (...) representatives of civil society, etc.', which was to take place in 2001 with a view to the adoption of a declaration 'containing appropriate initiatives for the continuation of this process' at the European Council in Laeken.
Parliament, for its part, after having sought to work in partnership with the national parliaments during the preparations for successive IGCs
Parliament, for its part, after having sought to work in partnership with the national parliaments during the preparations for successive IGCs
Mention need be made here only of the Rome ‘Assises’ involving the national parliaments (Conference of the Parliaments of the European Community, held from 27 to 30 November 1990), the interinstitutional conferences held in parallel with the IGCs on Economic and Monetary Union and Political Union, which culminated in the drafting of the Maastricht Treaty, the participation by Parliament representatives in the work of the Reflection Group prior to the Amsterdam IGC, followed by their involvement in the proceedings of the IGC itself, and, finally, their involvement as observers in the group set up to prepare the Nice IGC. , was the first to propose
Mention need be made here only of the Rome ‘Assises’ involving the national parliaments (Conference of the Parliaments of the European Community, held from 27 to 30 November 1990), the interinstitutional conferences held in parallel with the IGCs on Economic and Monetary Union and Political Union, which culminated in the drafting of the Maastricht Treaty, the participation by Parliament representatives in the work of the Reflection Group prior to the Amsterdam IGC, followed by their involvement in the proceedings of the IGC itself, and, finally, their involvement as observers in the group set up to prepare the Nice IGC. , was the first to propose
Resolution of 25 October 2000 (report by Olivier Duhamel on the constitutionalisation of the Treaties), confirmed by the resolution of 31 May 2001 (Méndez de Vigo/Seguro report on the assessment of the Treaty of Nice and the future of the European Union). , on the basis of the precedent set when the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union was drawn up
Resolution of 25 October 2000 (report by Olivier Duhamel on the constitutionalisation of the Treaties), confirmed by the resolution of 31 May 2001 (Méndez de Vigo/Seguro report on the assessment of the Treaty of Nice and the future of the European Union). , on the basis of the precedent set when the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union was drawn up
The idea of adopting such a Charter, which later became Part II of the Constitution, was first put forward by the German Council Presidency, which secured its acceptance by the Cologne European Council of 3 and 4 June 1999.
The idea of adopting such a Charter, which later became Part II of the Constitution, was first put forward by the German Council Presidency, which secured its acceptance by the Cologne European Council of 3 and 4 June 1999.
The method of drafting the Charter was also laid down at that European Council meeting, then clarified at the following meeting held in Tampere on 15 and 16 October 1999.
The method of drafting the Charter was also laid down at that European Council meeting, then clarified at the following meeting held in Tampere on 15 and 16 October 1999.
It was decided to establish a ‘body’ - subsequently termed ‘Convention’ - bringing together the four component parts of the Convention on the Future of Europe, but without the involvement of the applicant States. , the convening of a Convention comprising representatives of the Heads of State and Government of the Member States, the national parliaments and the European Parliament and the Commission and with the involvement, as full members, of representatives of the governments and parliaments of the applicant States.
It was decided to establish a ‘body’ - subsequently termed ‘Convention’ - bringing together the four component parts of the Convention on the Future of Europe, but without the involvement of the applicant States. , the convening of a Convention comprising representatives of the Heads of State and Government of the Member States, the national parliaments and the European Parliament and the Commission and with the involvement, as full members, of representatives of the governments and parliaments of the applicant States.
The Convention on the Charter of Fundamental Rights demonstrated that a body of this kind was able to prepare a draft text likely to secure the approval of the Heads of State or Government.
The Convention on the Charter of Fundamental Rights demonstrated that a body of this kind was able to prepare a draft text likely to secure the approval of the Heads of State or Government.
The open and transparent nature of the Convention and the quality of its debates had also facilitated efforts to achieve a consensus by giving every representative the opportunity, first of all, to express his or her own views, and, subsequently, to understand those of the other representatives.
The open and transparent nature of the Convention and the quality of its debates had also facilitated efforts to achieve a consensus by giving every representative the opportunity, first of all, to express his or her own views, and, subsequently, to understand those of the other representatives.
The Laeken European Council of 14 and 15 December 2001, by adopting the 'Laeken declaration on the future of European Union'
The Laeken European Council of 14 and 15 December 2001, by adopting the 'Laeken declaration on the future of European Union'
SN 300/1/01 REV 1, Annex 1, p.
SN 300/1/01 REV 1, Annex 1, p.
19. , followed up this initiative by setting out the organisational arrangements for the work of the Convention and, above all, defining its terms of reference and the issues that it would be called upon to discuss.
19. , followed up this initiative by setting out the organisational arrangements for the work of the Convention and, above all, defining its terms of reference and the issues that it would be called upon to discuss.
Thus, the Convention on the Future of Europe (chairman: Valéry Giscard d’Estaing; vice-chairmen: Giuliano Amato and Jean-Luc Dehaene) was given the task of drawing up a preliminary draft Constitution to serve as the basis for the work of the IGC which was to follow.
Thus, the Convention on the Future of Europe (chairman: Valéry Giscard d’Estaing; vice-chairmen: Giuliano Amato and Jean-Luc Dehaene) was given the task of drawing up a preliminary draft Constitution to serve as the basis for the work of the IGC which was to follow.
The outcome of the Convention confirmed that the choice of this method had been a wise one, since it led to the presentation, after 16 months’ work, of a consensus-based text informed by intense debates which also drew on close dialogue with civil society.
The outcome of the Convention confirmed that the choice of this method had been a wise one, since it led to the presentation, after 16 months’ work, of a consensus-based text informed by intense debates which also drew on close dialogue with civil society.
For its part, Parliament, through the work of its Committee on Constitutional Affairs, exerted a major influence on the draft Constitutional Treaty
For its part, Parliament, through the work of its Committee on Constitutional Affairs, exerted a major influence on the draft Constitutional Treaty
Resolution of 16 March 2000: Duff/Voggenhuber report on the drafting of a European Union Charter of Fundamental Rights (OJ C 377, 29.12.2000, p.
Resolution of 16 March 2000: Duff/Voggenhuber report on the drafting of a European Union Charter of Fundamental Rights (OJ C 377, 29.12.2000, p.
Decision of 14 November 2000: Duff/Voggenhuber report on approval of the draft Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (OJ C 223, 8.8.2001, p.
Decision of 14 November 2000: Duff/Voggenhuber report on approval of the draft Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union (OJ C 223, 8.8.2001, p.
Resolution of 23 October 2002: Duff report on the impact of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the Union and its future status (OJ C 300E, 11.12.2003, p.
Resolution of 23 October 2002: Duff report on the impact of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the Union and its future status (OJ C 300E, 11.12.2003, p.
Resolution of 29 November 2001: Leinen/Méndez de Vigo report on the Laeken European Council and the future of the Union (OJ C 153, 27.6.2002, p.
Resolution of 29 November 2001: Leinen/Méndez de Vigo report on the Laeken European Council and the future of the Union (OJ C 153, 27.6.2002, p.
Resolution of 25 October 2001: Poos report on the reform of the Council (OJ C 112, 9.5.2002, p.
Resolution of 25 October 2001: Poos report on the reform of the Council (OJ C 112, 9.5.2002, p.
Resolution of 14 March 2002: Carnero González report on the legal personality of the European Union (OJ C 47, 27.2.2003, p.
Resolution of 14 March 2002: Carnero González report on the legal personality of the European Union (OJ C 47, 27.2.2003, p.
Resolution of 7 February 2002: Napolitano report on relations between the European Parliament and the national parliaments in European integration (OJ C 284, 21.11.2002, p.
Resolution of 7 February 2002: Napolitano report on relations between the European Parliament and the national parliaments in European integration (OJ C 284, 21.11.2002, p.
Resolution of 16 May 2002: Lamassoure report on the division of competences between the European Union and the Member States (OJ C 180, 31.7.2003, p.
Resolution of 16 May 2002: Lamassoure report on the division of competences between the European Union and the Member States (OJ C 180, 31.7.2003, p.
Resolution of 17 December 2002: Bourlanges report on the typology of acts and the hierarchy of legislation in the European Union (OJ C 31, 5.2.2004, p.
Resolution of 17 December 2002: Bourlanges report on the typology of acts and the hierarchy of legislation in the European Union (OJ C 31, 5.2.2004, p.
Resolution of 14 January 2003: Napolitano report on the role of regional and local authorities in European integration (OJ C 38E, 12.2.2004, p.
Resolution of 14 January 2003: Napolitano report on the role of regional and local authorities in European integration (OJ C 38E, 12.2.2004, p.
Resolution of 24 September 2003 on the draft Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe and the European Parliament’s opinion on the convening of the Intergovernmental Conference (IGC) (OJ C 77E, 26.3.2004, p.
Resolution of 24 September 2003 on the draft Treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe and the European Parliament’s opinion on the convening of the Intergovernmental Conference (IGC) (OJ C 77E, 26.3.2004, p.
255). , only a very few provisions of which would be modified by the IGC.
255). , only a very few provisions of which would be modified by the IGC.
At that IGC, for the first time Parliament was fully involved in the proceedings, in the persons of its President, Pat Cox, and its two representatives, Íñigo Méndez de Vigo, subsequently replaced by Elmar Brok, and Klaus Hänsch.
At that IGC, for the first time Parliament was fully involved in the proceedings, in the persons of its President, Pat Cox, and its two representatives, Íñigo Méndez de Vigo, subsequently replaced by Elmar Brok, and Klaus Hänsch.
Unfortunately, the ratification procedure took an unexpected turn: the ‘no’ votes in the referendums in France and the Netherlands forced a rethink.
Unfortunately, the ratification procedure took an unexpected turn: the ‘no’ votes in the referendums in France and the Netherlands forced a rethink.
The European Council held in June 2005 ordered a period of reflection, to last at least one year, which was to be used to enable a broad debate to be held in all the Member States 'involving citizens, civil society, social partners, national parliaments and political parties'.
The European Council held in June 2005 ordered a period of reflection, to last at least one year, which was to be used to enable a broad debate to be held in all the Member States 'involving citizens, civil society, social partners, national parliaments and political parties'.
The European institutions were also invited to make their contribution.
The European institutions were also invited to make their contribution.
In the meantime, further ratifications have been carried out, some by means of referendums.
In the meantime, further ratifications have been carried out, some by means of referendums.
For its part, Parliament has fulfilled all its responsibilities in this area.
For its part, Parliament has fulfilled all its responsibilities in this area.
From the outset, it supported the idea of initiating an in-depth public debate at European level on the main issues at stake in the European integration process and rejected any attempt to push through the selective implementation of the Constitutional Treaty (cherry picking).
From the outset, it supported the idea of initiating an in-depth public debate at European level on the main issues at stake in the European integration process and rejected any attempt to push through the selective implementation of the Constitutional Treaty (cherry picking).
Parliament made its own particular contribution to the public debate by proposing that ‘interparliamentary forums’ should be held to discuss issues fundamental to the future of Europe.
Parliament made its own particular contribution to the public debate by proposing that ‘interparliamentary forums’ should be held to discuss issues fundamental to the future of Europe.
A total of three forums were held in the period leading up to the June 2007 European Council at which the decision was taken to reconvene the IGC
A total of three forums were held in the period leading up to the June 2007 European Council at which the decision was taken to reconvene the IGC
A fourth took place on 3 and 4 December 2007, after the political agreement on the Treaty of Lisbon had already been reached. .
A fourth took place on 3 and 4 December 2007, after the political agreement on the Treaty of Lisbon had already been reached. .
These forums helped to strengthen, among the elected representatives of the citizens of all the Member States, the conviction that the problems to which the Constitutional Treaty was intended as a response had not simply disappeared following the failure of the ratification process and that, although perhaps in a different form, the institutional changes it incorporated were overall still vitally needed in order to enable the Union to address the challenges awaiting it in an ever more globalised world.
These forums helped to strengthen, among the elected representatives of the citizens of all the Member States, the conviction that the problems to which the Constitutional Treaty was intended as a response had not simply disappeared following the failure of the ratification process and that, although perhaps in a different form, the institutional changes it incorporated were overall still vitally needed in order to enable the Union to address the challenges awaiting it in an ever more globalised world.
The German Presidency saw institutional issues return to the top of the Union agenda.
The German Presidency saw institutional issues return to the top of the Union agenda.
The procedure employed inevitably disappointed those who had experienced the atmosphere of dialogue and transparency which had marked the Convention, an atmosphere which had spilled over to the 2004 IGC, moreover.
The procedure employed inevitably disappointed those who had experienced the atmosphere of dialogue and transparency which had marked the Convention, an atmosphere which had spilled over to the 2004 IGC, moreover.
In an effort to guarantee real chances of success, the discussions on the relaunching of the reform of the Treaties were initially held bilaterally, between the Presidency and each of the Member States.
In an effort to guarantee real chances of success, the discussions on the relaunching of the reform of the Treaties were initially held bilaterally, between the Presidency and each of the Member States.
It should be noted that the EP was involved in the consultations from the outset through the work of the 'sherpas'
It should be noted that the EP was involved in the consultations from the outset through the work of the 'sherpas'
Name given to the two representatives from each Member State and from the EP and the Commission who took part in this preparatory phase of the talks.
Name given to the two representatives from each Member State and from the EP and the Commission who took part in this preparatory phase of the talks.
Parliament's 'sherpas' were Klaus Welle, the Head of President Hans-Gert Pöttering's Cabinet, and José Luís Pacheco, a member of the secretariat of the Committee on Constitutional Affairs. and was thus able to make its contribution to the drafting of the mandate which the German Presidency submitted to the June 2007 European Council.
Parliament's 'sherpas' were Klaus Welle, the Head of President Hans-Gert Pöttering's Cabinet, and José Luís Pacheco, a member of the secretariat of the Committee on Constitutional Affairs. and was thus able to make its contribution to the drafting of the mandate which the German Presidency submitted to the June 2007 European Council.
Since those 'sherpas' were appointed directly by the President of Parliament from among the staff of the Secretariat, an ad hoc information/consultation procedure was established involving the President, the chairman of the Committee on Constitutional Affairs and the political group coordinators from that committee.
Since those 'sherpas' were appointed directly by the President of Parliament from among the staff of the Secretariat, an ad hoc information/consultation procedure was established involving the President, the chairman of the Committee on Constitutional Affairs and the political group coordinators from that committee.
This preparatory work enabled the June 2007 European Council to convene a new IGC to resume the process of reforming the Treaties and also to lay down a very clear, precise and detailed remit, on the basis of which the Portuguese Presidency was able to conduct the proceedings of the IGC quickly and effectively.
This preparatory work enabled the June 2007 European Council to convene a new IGC to resume the process of reforming the Treaties and also to lay down a very clear, precise and detailed remit, on the basis of which the Portuguese Presidency was able to conduct the proceedings of the IGC quickly and effectively.
The IGC, which opened on 23 July 2007, at the meeting of the General Affairs Council, essentially operated on two levels: at ministerial level, with Parliament represented by three Members – Elmar Brok, Enrique Barón Crespo and Andrew Duff; and at the level of the group of legal experts, whose work had been prepared by the Council Legal Service and on which Parliament and the Commission were also represented.
The IGC, which opened on 23 July 2007, at the meeting of the General Affairs Council, essentially operated on two levels: at ministerial level, with Parliament represented by three Members – Elmar Brok, Enrique Barón Crespo and Andrew Duff; and at the level of the group of legal experts, whose work had been prepared by the Council Legal Service and on which Parliament and the Commission were also represented.
The work of the group of legal experts proved decisive in helping the IGC reach an agreement so quickly.
The work of the group of legal experts proved decisive in helping the IGC reach an agreement so quickly.
At political level, although the IGC met only three times prior to the Lisbon European Council it nevertheless resolved or excluded from discussion a large number of sensitive issues – the Portuguese Presidency having successfully imposed the rule that the remit would be changed only to deal with matters on which there was unanimous agreement among the Member States – so that in Lisbon the Heads of State or Government were left with negotiations on no more than two fundamental issues, only one of which derived from the Treaty itself: the definition of the new qualified-majority voting system in the Council, in the light of Poland's persistent dissatisfaction not only with the agreement reached in 2004, but also with the compromise laboriously thrashed out at the June 2007 European Council in Brussels.
At political level, although the IGC met only three times prior to the Lisbon European Council it nevertheless resolved or excluded from discussion a large number of sensitive issues – the Portuguese Presidency having successfully imposed the rule that the remit would be changed only to deal with matters on which there was unanimous agreement among the Member States – so that in Lisbon the Heads of State or Government were left with negotiations on no more than two fundamental issues, only one of which derived from the Treaty itself: the definition of the new qualified-majority voting system in the Council, in the light of Poland's persistent dissatisfaction not only with the agreement reached in 2004, but also with the compromise laboriously thrashed out at the June 2007 European Council in Brussels.
The other key unresolved matter was the composition of the EP as from the parliamentary term starting in 2009, an issue which, although not deriving directly from the Treaty, had become one of the main obstacles to the conclusion of an agreement, since Italy was fiercely opposed to the proposal for a decision drawn up by the EP at the request of the European Council.
The other key unresolved matter was the composition of the EP as from the parliamentary term starting in 2009, an issue which, although not deriving directly from the Treaty, had become one of the main obstacles to the conclusion of an agreement, since Italy was fiercely opposed to the proposal for a decision drawn up by the EP at the request of the European Council.
The other issues still under discussion – the British and Irish opt-outs/opt-ins on matters previously covered by the third pillar, the safeguarding of the EP's role in the appointment of the Vice-President/High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, etc. – had practically all been dealt with in the final days leading up to the European Council, in particular at the meeting of the IGC at ministerial level held during the General Affairs Council which took place on 15 October 2007 in Luxembourg.
The other issues still under discussion – the British and Irish opt-outs/opt-ins on matters previously covered by the third pillar, the safeguarding of the EP's role in the appointment of the Vice-President/High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, etc. – had practically all been dealt with in the final days leading up to the European Council, in particular at the meeting of the IGC at ministerial level held during the General Affairs Council which took place on 15 October 2007 in Luxembourg.
In Lisbon the Heads of State or Government were thus able to reach an agreement quickly: the IGC came to an end towards 01.00 on Friday, 19 October 2007.
In Lisbon the Heads of State or Government were thus able to reach an agreement quickly: the IGC came to an end towards 01.00 on Friday, 19 October 2007.