Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/1999-12-14-Speech-2-050"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.19991214.3.2-050"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
"I will take the floor again very briefly, Mr President, to make some points about the previous debate.
I can see that there is an almost unanimous feeling of disappointment over the failed agreement on tax matters, and I believe that the reasons for this are broadly shared. There was also almost universal agreement about Chechnya and the need for us not to have double standards in our foreign policy, but to reassert the principles which are the cornerstone of the European Union. Moreover, there is a generally favourable opinion of the European Union’s rapid intervention force, even if there were some who disagreed over this. It has always been the tradition to disagree, not only in the European Parliament but also in many national parliaments, when it comes to issues relating in some way to military matters, and the possibility of having a European army.
Nevertheless, I would like to comment briefly on the more controversial subject of the Intergovernmental Conference. I have to say that the Commission is not in any way being excluded from decisions on the Intergovernmental Conference, and I also have to say that Parliament’s role has been increased, with respect to Amsterdam, even if the progress is less than stated by the Commission and the President of Parliament during the Helsinki debate. But some progress has been made, and we can analyse it objectively: two representatives of the European Parliament will participate in all the talks and will be able to intervene at the beginning and end of each meeting at the Intergovernmental Conference; in addition, in each meeting of this type there will be talks between the President of Parliament and the Heads of State and Government. This is minimal progress, but I assure you – and this is the important message I want to give you – that in this area, the Commission and the President of Parliament have taken the same line on increasing the presence of Parliament itself. I think that this is a route we should pursue. We must therefore say that the direction we have been heading in is the right one, even though the pace is extremely slow compared with the pace we had set ourselves. However, we must not only look to the past: this is some advice, a lesson with a view what we have to do in the coming six months.
Leaving the door open as regards the agenda for the Intergovernmental Conference also provides an opportunity for the Commission and Parliament to cooperate in bringing in the reforms that we want via that door. Before the Helsinki Conference, the door was closed; its opening is not, of course, a particularly significant result, but it is a lot more than we had expected and a lot more than was going to be allowed before the start of the Conference. We must therefore learn a lesson as regards working together over the coming months. We need to cooperate closely, precisely because it is through this door that the necessary reforms can come.
As for the rest, I will conclude with an observation on enlargement. It is true, as Mr
Poettering said, that time will tell whether or not it will be historic, but the decision is an important one. As a consequence of this decision, we shall have to change a large number of our rules and current points of reference; we shall have to change a lot about our life, our culture, our budgets, our positions – everything we are doing.
It is a decision which has yet to be implemented. On the other hand, it is clear that it will take years and a thorough analysis, because we need to reassure the public in the countries that are joining the Union, by showing them the real situation here, and making an accurate and serious comparison of legal, economic, political and transparency issues. In short, we have started a process that will take us to an historic conclusion. We have not yet reached it, but what we decided at Helsinki will have an enormous bearing on the work of Parliament and the work of the European Commission. This is another area we must work on together so that a virtuous circle will come of it, and so that politics as well as the economy – both ours and of the countries that have applied for membership – can grow together and expand in the future."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples