Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-11-14-Speech-2-061"

PredicateValue (sorted: default)
rdf:type
dcterms:Date
dcterms:Is Part Of
dcterms:Language
lpv:document identification number
"en.20001114.3.2-061"2
lpv:hasSubsequent
lpv:speaker
lpv:translated text
"Mr President, Commissioner, rapporteurs, ladies and gentlemen, you requested a debate on the European Union’s relations with Turkey, and you are aware of the importance the Council attaches to strengthening this relationship, which has gained new currency since this country’s candidature was recognised in Helsinki. The debate on the two reports presented by Mr Morillon and Mr Seppänen comes at precisely the right moment, as the Commission has just submitted two very important reports to us, firstly, its latest report on the progress made by Turkey along the road to accession and, secondly, its proposal for an accession partnership agreement with Turkey. Major prospects are opening up to us, and we know the task will be long and complex. Let us be demanding, let us be vigilant, but at the same time, let us remain consistent with the logic of our decision, making a bet on Turkey, having confidence in its determination for rapprochement with the European Union, and let us therefore assist Turkey to boost its ability to implement the necessary reforms which we quite legitimately expect of the country. I shall begin, with your permission, with Mr Morillon’s extremely interesting report, which deals with the whole range of Euro-Turkish relations and, more specifically, with the progress report presented by the Commission in 1999, a few weeks prior to the Helsinki European Council. In recognising Turkey’s candidature, the European Council was following the recommendations made in the Commission’s report, whose analysis I believe we can all endorse. Since then, both the European Union and Turkey have taken steps to put the Helsinki decisions into practice. I am, of course, thinking of the work undertaken within the Association Council with a view to bringing Turkish legislation into line with the . More especially, however, as indeed Mr Morillon pointed out, I am thinking of the efforts made by Turkey to adapt to European standards and practices, particularly in the area of respect for human rights and consolidation of the rule of law. There is still, as we are aware, a lot of work to be done, but I feel that Turkey is starting to get used to the idea of reforms. It is therefore up to us Europeans to support this country on its very long and difficult road to accession. In this respect, I have no doubt but that the determination of each and every one of us to help Turkey progress along the path of democratisation will in the end prevail. Who could do this better than the European Parliament? I can therefore only be delighted at the proposal you have made to establish a Europe-Turkey Forum of human rights, thereby enabling Turkish citizens to size up the European prospects being opened to them, as well as Europe’s requirements. Having said that, I am of course aware that Turkey’s candidature continues to raise questions. I have noted reservations on the part of many people, not just within the European Parliament, but also in all the Member States. I have taken note of your wish, as expressed most clearly by Mr Morillon, to be fully involved in the destiny of Euro-Turkish relations. I wish to make myself perfectly clear on this point. I do not think that anyone is trying to dodge the issue in this respect, quite the opposite. A good many discussions have already taken place, right here in the European Parliament as well as within the national parliaments of Member States. These discussions have occasionally been difficult but also, I am convinced, profitable. For its part, the French Presidency has no intention of shirking this legitimate concern for transparency, information and debate. I feel that Mr Morillon’s excellent report bears witness to your determination to bring Turkey’s pre-accession process to a successful conclusion, while exercising the utmost vigilance, quite legitimately, regarding the still considerable reforms which this country has yet to undertake. We all agree that negotiations cannot in any case commence, let me stress that fact, until Turkey has met the Copenhagen political criteria in full. That is why I took careful note of the suggestions made by Mr Morillon regarding the preconditions for Turkey’s accession, which are certainly worth looking into. We are indeed all aware, yourselves, the Council Presidency and also, I believe, the Commission, whose latest report on the progress achieved in Turkey stressed once again the efforts this country still needs to made, the reforms still to be implemented in areas as crucial as respect for human rights, fundamental freedoms and minority rights, in particular, areas in which, as we can only regret, progress is still too slow and even inadequate. We must, however, also beware, as your report wisely emphasises, of setting new, extravagant conditions on Turkish candidature. Let me stress the fact that Turkey must be treated on an equal footing with the other candidates. It is, in my opinion, a fundamental principle which was laid down Helsinki, and one which must govern the strengthening of Euro-Turkish relations. For, generally speaking, I think it would be regrettable if we were to give Turkey the impression that we are going back on the commitments we have given and on the principles we ourselves laid down in Helsinki. That is why, in the same spirit, the European Union must fulfil the commitments it has made with regard to this country, which I think it imperative to meet, particularly in terms of financial aid. The French Presidency has made this one of its objectives and I believe we are making progress. This House has, of course, on several occasions been invited to give an opinion on this matter, be it the MEDA Programme or the financial regulations proposed by the Commission to ensure Euro-Turkish rapprochement and to support the customs union, but there are also the European Investment Bank projects, which are essential in order to support Turkey’s economic development and to continue the reconstruction work undertaken following the earthquake. I am pleased, in this respect, with the conclusions the report presented by Mr Seppänen on the EIB special action programme in support of the consolidation and intensification of the EC-Turkey customs union. When it last held the presidency, in 1995, France spared no effort in order to conclude this customs union agreement, which has since been in force since 1 January 1996. It must, however, be acknowledged that the funding allocated to Turkey since then has not always reflected the level of commitments which the Union made at that time. Progress has been made, however, particularly in the course of the last year, and I am pleased to see the increase announced by the Commission in appropriations allocated to this country. It is indeed important that the financial resources made available to Turkey should match up to the objectives that have been set. For its part, the Presidency would like to see this special action programme of EIB loans adopted by the Council very soon, probably as early as the forthcoming meeting of the Council of Ministers of Economic and Financial Affairs on 27 November. I would add that we are all awaiting with keen interest the proposal announced by the Commission for a single regulation intended to coordinate all sources of Community aid to Turkey, in line with the plans made in Helsinki. It is only natural to standardise the arrangements for pre-accession aid to that country with those applicable to the other candidates according to the Phare Programme model. Parliament will, of course, have the opportunity to deliver an opinion on this matter, when the time comes. As you know, however, this pre-accession aid will be more particularly intended to help Turkey achieve the objectives laid down in the future accession partnership agreement. This is a key instrument in the pre-accession strategy for this country, and its importance was rightly highlighted in the recent Commission report. This is a proposal which is going to be examined in detail by the competent Council bodies, so you will understand that I cannot, in my capacity as President-in-Office of the Council, afford to pre-judge the situation. Without prejudice to the debate due to start this week, I think I may safely say, however, that the Commission has presented a very constructive and very demanding proposal, both for the European Union and for Turkey. In this respect, I am delighted to see that their proposal is in line with many of the very welcome recommendations made by Mr Morillon. I am thinking of the intensified work to achieve democratisation, particularly in the area of the separation of powers or of declaring an end to the state of emergency in a number of Turkish provinces. The Presidency’s preference is for this draft to be adopted very quickly, indeed, if possible, as early as 20 November, the date of the forthcoming General Affairs Council, and, as I have already mentioned, for it to comply with the very specific decisions adopted in Helsinki. It will then be up to Turkey to take its inspiration from this in order to work out its own national programme to integrate the and in order to implement the reforms, all the reforms necessary, with the support of the European Union."@en1
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata

Named graphs describing this resource:

1http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/English.ttl.gz
2http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/Events_and_structure.ttl.gz

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph