Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-06-14-Speech-3-317"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20000614.10.3-317"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
"I will start with the last part of the honourable Member’s question by saying that we were not the ones who gave stature to someone who does not deserve this. It was Doctor Wolfgang Schüssel who did this by agreeing to an alliance with the party of Mr Haider. With regard to the result of the Austrian elections, I clearly said that we fully respect the result of these elections. Austria is a free country and one where the elections are held in a totally legal manner and with full transparency. The problem is that the result of this free election, as has happened in the past in other countries, brought a certain party to power. You should realise that there is actually something strange in the Austrian internal situation. The party which received the most votes was the Social Democratic Party which did not want to form a government. The party with the second highest number of votes was the FPO which was not invited to form a government. It is rather strange, in terms of usual constitutional arrangements, that in a European country the second-placed party was not invited to form a government but the third-placed party was instead. Therefore, this is not a case of business as usual. It actually involves a kind of reassessment given the potential capacity of Mr Haider to become the leader of an Austrian government.
We do not dispute the Austrian elections and we do not dispute the right of the Austrian people to choose the government they want. However, no one can force us to enter into relations with a government containing a party which has so far not renounced what it said in its electoral campaign nor the gravity of what it said. It is a shame that this is not being clearly emphasised. The gravity of what was said by Mr Haider and by the FPO in the elections is something which should make us all think, bearing in mind the future of Europe. We should think about the racist and xenophobic statements which have been systematically made by this party. Curiously, it did not distance itself from these during its last conference, and instead reaffirmed all its pride in its past statements when it had a specific opportunity to rectify the current situation. Nothing leads us to believe that there has been any positive change which may justify a new attitude of the European Union and, in particular, which may create the opportunity for any type of discussion on this matter within the European Union. We do not feel that this issue is a matter for the European Union but is rather for the other 14 governments to decide. So far – and we will have to wait and see what happens next – these governments have maintained a position of recognising that this situation is serious and that it requires a change, but not necessarily by the 14 governments. There is in fact an almost media-wide presumption that the change in attitude at this time should come from the 14 countries. Why? What has changed in the Austrian situation which could lead us to change our attitude? Only time? We consider that it is the Austrians and the Austrian Government which must change if they want us to adopt a different attitude. That is the essence of the matter. Why systematically place the onus on the 14 countries? Why must the 14 Member States change? What has happened in Austria to justify this change? Clearly this does not necessarily mean that we will not consider other ways in the future of assessing the development of this situation and in fact this is what will happen in the coming days."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples