Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-10-03-Speech-2-153"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20001003.4.2-153"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, I would join the chorus of those who say that the forthcoming enlargement is now the main task of the EU. If this does not succeed, then nor shall we. We could make ourselves comfortable in our little club, but its whole
would then be lost, and we should not be able to secure the large perspectives of peace, freedom and stability. Nor shall we succeed, however, if we do not appreciate that enlargement should, first and foremost, be for the benefit not only of a few people but of all people in the candidate countries, or in any case the majority of them. And with all due respect for what is being said and written in Parliament, a broad democratic base is something we do not have. I therefore also listened very carefully to Commissioner Verheugen’s words about ‘selling’ the EU to the candidate countries, for the majority of Central and Eastern European countries – if not all of them – have, of course, said that they want to hold referenda, or in any case have not said that they do not, and I personally think that this is a good idea. One should be clear, however, that there is undeniably a danger of people voting ‘no’.
So what were the problems Mr Verheugen thought were of concern to citizens? He mentioned migration, competition, social dumping, prices etc.. All obviously real concerns, but I think there is one thing which overshadows all others, that of how they can survive as countries, nations and States. Now, I am, admittedly, talking partly against the background of the fact that I come from a small country which has just voted ‘no’ in a referendum. This ‘no’ will now be analysed carefully in the days to come. There is no doubt at all that right-wing forces have been involved. We have also seen who has paid for the advertisements. Egoism and, especially, populism have also played their part. Nor, certainly, has the falling rate of the euro helped things in the right direction. Even though there are, of course, many of us who are aware of the historical basis for the euro and of what the whole thing is about, it has not been enough to convince people. But having said all that, it is questions about how we can survive as a State that have occupied people’s minds. How is one to get around the fact that it is really politicians in the big countries such as Germany and France who make the decisions? I think it is incredibly important that we bear this factor in mind when negotiating with the candidate countries. I can fully guarantee you that, in those countries, the spectre of union is very easy to conjure up. They have in fact experienced it at first hand for a very long time.
Another lesson from Denmark, which is directly relevant to the Committee on whose behalf I am speaking, is that everything suggests that there are far more women than men who have voted ‘no’. If we are not to risk a repeat performance in the candidate countries, it is crucial that we be clear about the fact that enlargement should not be of benefit only to men but also be of benefit to women. I believe that, up until now, all objective investigations have shown that the transition to a market economy has had a greater impact upon women than upon men. A great deal of pressure has been placed upon traditional social values in the former planned economies of Central and Eastern Europe. The rapid restructuring of the old State-run industries which is at present taking place has of course resulted in serious unemployment for both men and women, at the same time as the private sector has still not managed to fill the vacuum. And, as I say, the figures suggest that there are a great many women who have become unemployed. Even in countries such as Lithuania, where there is an economic upturn, it is not women, but men, who get to fill the jobs in the private sector.
For one reason or another, it is evidently thought that men are the ones who really possess the entrepreneur gene. We therefore need to realise that women are much more vulnerable in this process of readjustment and therefore much more vulnerable in relation to the Union project as a whole than we have indicated up until now. I would strongly urge the Commission to be alert to this in all its negotiations with the candidate countries. If we do not secure jobs for women, if we do not ensure that the non-governmental organisations are there to talk about the Union project, then we can forget all about obtaining a democratic endorsement. We shall not succeed. It is therefore also important, of course, that, in connection with enlargement, we ensure that the legislation on equality is implemented sensibly so that the enlargement we are all hoping for – and I would here point out that one of the countries in which there is most support for enlargement is in fact Denmark – can also in actual fact take place. This cannot, however, happen by itself, and I would very much urge that attention be given to the position of women."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples