Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-01-17-Speech-3-191"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20010117.6.3-191"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, President-in-Office of the Council, there are several points in the programme of the Swedish Presidency which we in the United Left support. In our opinion, the priorities – enlargement, the environment and employment – are important as well as justified. There are also other positive features of the programme which deserve to be highlighted. These include measures to combat trafficking in women and the efforts to attain lasting peace in Palestine.
The greatest disappointment among Sweden’s actions is probably, however, the militarisation of the EU. Not only does Sweden give up its policies of non-alignment and independence, but it is now also going to work actively towards implementing the militarisation of the EU. The EU army will even include Turkish troops. Troops that one day can commit acts of cruelty in their own country or occupy a neighbouring country are allowed to serve in the EU army the next day. As a NATO country, Turkey also demands influence over EU policy in this area in order to make NATO’s military resources available. Consequently, my third question to Göran Persson is the following: Can you promise that Turkey will not be given any such influence?
I am looking forward to the responses to my three questions. These concern the possibility of no longer discriminating against Hungary and the Czech Republic under the Nice Agreement, what you are going to do to make the Tobin tax a reality, and how you view Turkey’s participation in, and influence over, the EU’s military forces. With these words, the United Left would like to wish the Swedish Presidency every success.
Where the discussions on enlargement are concerned, we consider it to be of vital importance that the EU take into consideration the specific needs of the applicant countries and that these countries not be offered a second-class EU membership.
In relation to this objective, the outcome of the Nice Summit is a failure. No reforms to the EU were actually made there which would facilitate enlargement. Instead, the decision process became more complicated. It is also totally unacceptable that applicant countries such as the Czech Republic and Hungary should have been directly discriminated against in that they will receive fewer places in the European Parliament than EU countries with comparable populations. This is an embarrassing mistake which must be rectified. My first question to the Swedish Presidency is therefore the following: Are you prepared to deal with, and rectify, this mistake in the Accession Treaties which are now about to be negotiated?
Certain EU countries want to exclude citizens of the future EU countries from the Union’s labour market for a long period. Such discrimination is not acceptable. Instead, it is of vital importance that all those working in an EU country should be obliged to observe that country’s agreements and laws on the labour market, so that free movement does not result in dumping where social provisions are concerned.
Real left-wing politics must give top priority to employment even in matters of economic policy, instead of to the dogmatic monetarism which currently dominates the EU and economic and monetary union. Such a policy would also require democratic control of the European Central Bank. Irrespective of their political complexion, present-day EU governments have, however, made the adaptation to EMU their priority, rather than welfare and the fight against unemployment. This policy must be reconsidered.
In various parts of the European Union, there are growing demands for the continuous deregulations and free speculation we are witnessing today to be replaced by a situation in which unbridled capitalism is controlled by political decisions. One of the demands being made is for taxation on currency transactions, a so-called Tobin tax. Several members of the Swedish Government have talked in positive terms about this idea. Now – during this presidency – is your golden opportunity to take initiatives. My second question to the presidency is therefore the following: What initiatives regarding a ‘Tobin tax’ are you planning during your presidency?
During the next six months, the most important question regarding environmental issues will be the negotiations in connection with the Kyoto Protocol to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases. It is extremely important to reach an agreement over this issue, but even more so to reach an agreement of substance. In our opinion, such an agreement must be based upon genuine reductions in emissions and not upon rich countries’ (which are already responsible for most emissions) being given the right to buy an opt-out via trade in emission rights.
Sweden’s action in the settlement regarding genetically modified crops, which was recently finalised, was disappointing. Sweden actively opposed public registers of GM crops. We hope that Sweden will mend its ways and refrain from working towards revoking the de facto moratorium which exists on the issue. From an environmental point of view, EU legislation in this area is still inadequate
Unfortunately, it seems that the Swedish Presidency does not want to do anything to essentially change the EU’s irresponsible refugee policy which, with the Schengen Agreement as its instrument, every day gives rise to new tragedies. Instead, we have seen how Sweden accepts deterioration, most recently by increasing the responsibility borne by transporters. This involves a kind of privatisation of the screening for asylum purposes, where the fate of many asylum seekers is in practice decided by airport personnel outside the European Union."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples