Brussels, 21/06/2005 (Agence Europe) - The co-president of the European Parliament Greens group, Daniel Cohn Bendit, explained to the press on Tuesday that they are proposing that a referendum be held of the European Constitution at the end of 2007. “With the French and Dutch no-vote, the European project has lost its legitimacy, as the Constitutional Treaty was rightly the expression of a necessary evolution, which, with the refusal of the Constitution, has briefly halted. This loss of legitimacy was again reinforced by the failure at the European Council…Europe will only find its legitimacy with a European referendum”. He explained that the referendum would not necessarily happen the same day and that the result would be acquired by double majority (States and population of the EU). He stated that this should be preceded by a “detailed debate on the Europe we want, including the Union's fate” - a genuine European debate taking part in the public arena. He said that the European Parliament had to play the main role in this debate on the basis of proposals made by the constitutional committee and then submitted to the plenary, taking into account the reference to the draft Constitution. Monica Frassoni co-president of the group said that the EUY had to act rapidly on three dossiers worrying citizens: directives on liberalisation of services, REACH on chemicals and working hours. The question will finally be posed to European citizens in 2007 but is clearly unknown as it will depend on the results for the debate. During the debate, EP Greens will appeal for a “review of the economical and social policies of the EU”, explained Cohn-Bendit, as it is necessary to find the best means for “relaunching the European economic machine”, namely more Keynes at Brussels. The Greens want to open the debate on the EU's own resources, rather than remain stuck in the destructive debate between net contributors and beneficiaries. Cohn-Bendit said that the EU had to have its own resources because it was at this moment that it had to take political initiatives. He also said that the CAP had to be revised but “not in any which way, and certainly not in the way Blair proposed”.