Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-06-14-Speech-3-194"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20000614.8.3-194"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"I am extremely grateful to the House for the opportunity to comment on these extremely important matters. As a number of honourable Members have noted, Mr Taoufik Ben Brik's hunger strike is over, but it has had a major impact both on the authorities in Tunisia and on civil society. It sparked a public debate in Tunisia on the human rights situation in that country.
I want to put the debate on Tunisia in context and to take up a point that was made by Mr Hernández Mollar and some other honourable Members as well. Of course there will be events and developments that crowd in on us. Today, inevitably, we have to give a good deal of attention to our efforts to rebuilding in the Balkans and, in particular, to prevent further social and political disintegration. It is a policy in south-east Europe which, I should add, is not irrelevant to stability and prosperity in the Mediterranean.
But if I have to judge where we are going to face the main challenge in the medium and longer term, it would be, to be candid, our policy in and around the Mediterranean. What is at the heart of the Union's common foreign and security policy? It is the projection of stability. That is the crucial element in our policy in the Mediterranean. What are we trying to do there? It is true that we are trying to create, if you like, the Mediterranean equivalent of NAFTA. But there is more than that, which I will come to in a moment. I just want to make it clear to the honourable Member that my commitment to making this policy a success is total.
One of the things that most offends me at the moment is that our record in supporting it through development assistance is not nearly as good as it should have been. For year after year we have only been able to spend 40% or less of what we have committed in the Mediterranean, partly because of absorption problems in the region, partly because of our own failures, which I am keen to address.
I will make this bargain with the honourable Member: if, by the time I leave my job as a commissioner in 2005, our record in closing the gap between commitments and payments is not a hell of a lot better than it has been in the last three years then he can have a contribution to his favourite charity. That is what I would like to be taken as a mark of whether or not we are committed to making a success of our policy in the Mediterranean. It is extremely important that we use our existing instruments much more competently, much more effectively. That is what I would like to be judged on.
I want to repeat: this is not just about creating a free trade area, important as that may be. Free trade is not the end; free trade is a means to an end. The end is the creation of an area of prosperity and political stability to the south of the sea that we have shared with North Africa and the Middle East for all these millennia; it is about the sharing of values, as well as the sharing of trade. It is not about creating hub economies which will make Europeans more prosperous: it is about working in partnership with Mediterranean countries in a partnership of values as well as trade, for the good of people to the south of the Mediterranean as well as those of us in Europe. It is an enormously important part of Europe's endeavours over the next few years; as important, in some ways in projecting stability, as the whole process of enlargement. I very much hope that in the next five years we will be able to carry that programme forward in Tunisia and the rest of the region.
I want to make it clear that the Commission shares the view of the UN Special Rapporteur who states in his report to the Commission on Human Rights that: "Tunisia still has a long way to go to take full advantage of its favourable economic context and adopt measures designed to strengthen the protection of human rights and, in particular, the right to freedom of opinion and expression".
But how can the Commission and the European Union in general influence Tunisia's rate of progress in this area? This is best done by looking at the three main instruments provided by the association agreement linking the European Union to Tunisia.
The first, to which my colleague referred, is political dialogue. This dialogue has already given us the opportunity to comment on Tunisia's human rights situation twice at ministerial level at the two Association Councils that have taken place to date. The Union has made a point of addressing the human rights issues in Tunisia in our many contacts with the Tunisian authorities.
The second instrument is the financing of positive measures in the form of grants from the Community budget for projects promoting the exercise of political and civil rights. The MEDA programme for democracy, on which Parliament has strong and positive views, has financed training, information and awareness-raising projects for NGOs and for public opinion in this field. A programme of support for the Tunisian media has already been included in the programming of future financial cooperation with Tunisia and should be the subject of necessary consultations with the Tunisian Government.
As Mr Dupuis reminded us, sustainable economic development and political stability depend, above all, from Russia to the Mediterranean, on strong institutions, not on strong men. It sometimes requires strong men to ensure that the institutions themselves are strong and operate within the rule of law.
The third instrument is the European Union's option of adopting restrictive measures, the most radical of which would obviously be the suspension of cooperation.
The Commission considers that, before having recourse to any restrictive measures, positive means offered by the partnership should be pursued to the limit. There is still significant scope both at the level of political dialogue and the financing of support programmes. I would like to explore this further with Tunisia. Specifically, the Commission wishes to see to what extent the Tunisian Government will implement its promises regarding reform of the press code and facilitating freedom of association. We also wish to see if our efforts to support the desired reforms by providing funding from the Community budget prove successful. I will keep Parliament informed of developments in all these areas.
The issues that we have been discussing this afternoon are extremely important. I know that Parliament is aware of the whole picture. Mrs Napoletano, in her interesting address, pointed out the economic and social progress that has been made in Tunisia. Others could have referred, for example, to the position of Tunisia on the sharia law. Nevertheless, there are issues which give considerable cause for concern. It is best at the moment to proceed by dialogue but, as the House will understand, I do not equate dialogue with being supine. Parliament has legitimate concerns and a strongly felt point of view. That can be expressed firmly but courteously, as Parliament is doing today."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples