Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-04-11-Speech-2-115"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20000411.5.2-115"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, in the debate preceding the Lisbon Summit I said that the preparatory documents seemed to show that, in tackling the new economy, the Heads of States and Government were torn between a centralised, bureaucratic approach and a freer, more simply coordinated approach.
Following this Council meeting, in our view, the scales have tipped in favour of the freer approach, since the Lisbon conclusions declare that there is no question of adding further European regulations to those which exist already but, quite the contrary, of implementing – the expression is used several times – a new open method of coordination.
The knowledge economy which we are moving into is thus already having a retroactive effect on our concept of the European institutions, for this new method of coordination must mean, as we already know, that top-down authoritarian integration and uniformising regulations are to be abandoned and replaced by a system in which the States and national democracies will play a much more important role, and will combine within networks following the specific model of a computer network. The Union as such must then simply play the role of coordinator and catalyst, to use the precise word used in the Lisbon conclusions.
This new method also entails the European Council rediscovering its fundamental strategic guidance mission, while allowing the various Councils of Ministers to take the practical decisions and the Commission to prepare and execute policy. This is the way we may finally achieve more balanced and more democratic European institutions.
The Lisbon conclusions, Mr President, may, however, in other respects, give rise to a number of reservations. Since there is not much time, let me cite just one: the proactive goal of increasing the proportion of women in employment from 51% to 60% by 2010. This really is the type of authoritarian attitude which should be a thing of the past. It is not up to the authorities to say how many women must go out to work. This is a matter for the interested parties and civil society. The authorities must simply ensure that housewives receive fair treatment and that personal choices may be made freely."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples