Angaben zur Quelle [Bearbeiten]
| Autor | Thierry Chopin, Jean-François Jamet |
| Titel | How to unblock the EU’s unanimity stalemate |
| Zeitschrift | Europe's World |
| Datum | 1. October 2008 |
| URL | http://europesworld.org/2008/10/01/how-to-unblock-the-eus-unanimity-stalemate/#.WPr3svmGPIU |
Literaturverz. |
no |
| Fußnoten | no |
| Fragmente | 1 |
| [1.] Ama/Fragment 064 03 - Diskussion Zuletzt bearbeitet: 2017-11-21 13:09:23 Schumann | Ama, Chopin Jamet 2008, Fragment, Gesichtet, KomplettPlagiat, SMWFragment, Schutzlevel sysop |
|
|
|
| Untersuchte Arbeit: Seite: 64, Zeilen: 3-20 |
Quelle: Chopin Jamet 2008 Seite(n): 1 (online source), Zeilen: - |
|---|---|
| The Irish referendum's NO to the Lisbon Treaty has been a forceful reminder on how the EU is perpetually threatened with paralysis whenever a unanimous decision is needed. Institutional reform is among the most striking examples of this, not least because it would have the effect of expanding Union's decision-making powers by introducing more qualified majority voting. The Unanimity problem also applies to areas like defence, immigration, energy, taxation, the protection of intellectual property, foreign policy and police and judicial cooperation. In all these cases, it can often be very hard to reach a consensus between 27 Member States and that inevitably impedes the whole process of European Integration. The logical conclusion of all this is that while it is essential to recognize the individual circumstances of any one Member State, the time has come to establish a decision-making framework that will allow progress to be made by those EU states that are able to agree on common actions.
The EU's history clearly shows that differentiated integration — both within and outside the framework of Treaties — is a practical proposition. The Euro, Schengen, Space Policy, and inter-governmental cooperation on industrial policy matters, are just e [sic] few examples of this. |
The Irish referendum’s “no” to the Lisbon treaty has been a forceful reminder of how the EU is perpetually threatened with paralysis whenever a unanimous decision is needed. Institutional reform is among the most striking examples of this, not least because it would have the effect of expanding the Union’s decision-making powers by introducing more qualified majority voting.
The unanimity problem also applies to areas like defence, immigration, energy, taxation, the protection of intellectual property, foreign policy and police and judicial cooperation. In all of these cases, it can often be very hard to reach a consensus between 27 member states, and that inevitably impedes the whole process of European integration. The logical conclusion of all this is that while it is essential to recognise the individual circumstances of any one member state, the time has come to establish a decision-making framework that will allow progress to be made by those EU states that are able to agree on common actions. The EU’s history clearly shows that differentiated integration – both within and outside the framework of treaties – is a practical proposition. The euro, Schengen, space policy, and inter-governmental cooperation on industrial policy matters, are just a few examples of this. |
The source is not given. |
|