Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-03-14-Speech-3-298"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20010314.13.3-298"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"This is a good report. I congratulate the rapporteur. It gives an impressive overview of the situation in Ukraine at a crucial juncture in the country's history. The current events there are of deep concern to all of us. The regrettable violence in recent days and its causes underline the present risks to the political and economic stability that are so important for Ukraine, as our common strategy makes clear. The situation is particularly worrying, given that Ukraine will share such a long border with the European Union after the first round of enlargement.
We need to recognise and act upon the legitimate concerns in the Ukraine regarding the possible consequences of enlargement. Overall I remain convinced that these will be largely beneficial to the Ukrainian economy but there will be problems, for example, on the movement of people between the Ukraine and its western neighbours. We need to take the time to manage these issues so that they do not become a barrier between the enlarged European Union and our Ukrainian partners.
Mr Van Orden referred to the stockpile of anti-personnel landmines in Ukraine. The point he makes is entirely valid. It is one which we were recently discussing with our Canadian colleagues at the ministerial meeting between the European Union and Canada and I hope that we can make progress on that extremely important subject in the months and years ahead.
The work that we – the presidency, the Commission and Parliament – have done so far is evidence enough of the seriousness of our engagement in Ukraine. Despite the considerable internal problems in that country, some progress has undoubtedly been achieved. The closure of Chernobyl, for example, has marked, I hope, a turning point but we shall still be deeply involved in the follow-up.
In terms of our political agenda we can now focus on other issues: on the rule of law, on democratic checks and balances, on stimulating trade and investment, on setting the framework for cooperation in justice and home affairs and on the relationship between Ukraine and the European Union after enlargement. This is vital work on which all the European institutions will need to concentrate in the coming years.
I congratulate the honourable Member on his report. I rather sympathise with his view. I do not think that it required all the subsequent authorship to which it has been subjected but he showed a good deal of long-suffering charity in his remarks, which is also not surprising. He has written an excellent report and our relationship with the Ukraine will benefit from his wise advice.
Ukraine wants to draw closer to the European Union and its neighbours. We welcome that. But, for that to happen, Ukraine must be able to demonstrate its willingness and ability to live up to basic values, European values, values which are also set out in our partnership and cooperation agreement. That means strengthening the rule of law. It means making progress in the fight against corruption. It means adopting market-oriented legislation. As the report points out, Ukraine has, alas, lost a lot of time, but it is a country with a vast potential in terms of economic and human resources. With the creation of the government under President Yushchenko things have certainly improved but there is still very much to be done.
Several Members have referred to the Gongadze case. It has brought to the fore not just the issue of journalistic freedom but of a pluralistic society and the way executive power is exercised in Ukraine. The House will recall that in early December, shortly after the Kuchma tapes had been presented in Parliament, the European Union expressed its deep concern about the disappearance of Mr Gongadze. In January, President Prodi had a long conversation on this case with President Kuchma when they met in Berlin. I am sure Parliament will have seen the statement that the Swedish Presidency released prior to the recent ministerial troika visit to Ukraine. I was part of that troika delegation. I can assure Parliament that we made our position abundantly clear. The only way to deal with this issue is complete transparency in the short term and adequate checks and balances in the longer term.
I want to emphasise this evening – it should not be necessary to do so – how strongly we feel about this issue. The Swedish Presidency has included the European Union's support for the establishment of a free media in Ukraine in its working programme on the implementation of the common strategy. It will organise a seminar on independent media in Kiev. We are also ready to provide technical assistance.
The report rightly stresses the need to promote economic growth and trade in Ukraine, but for this the conditions must be right. Recent reports drawn up by the European Business Association, the OECD and private bodies concentrate on the overall investment climate. They make clear how far there still is to go. In Ukraine the private sector still accounts for less than a quarter of GDP. An EBRD study two years ago suggested that managers of Ukrainian enterprises spend up to 17% of their time just trying to find a way through regulatory requirements.
As stated in the excellent report before us, energy sector reform is absolutely crucial for economic stability and growth in Ukraine. It is also a key condition in the memorandum of understanding of 1995 on the closure of the Chernobyl nuclear plant. Together with our international partners we are following Ukraine's progress in reforming the energy sector very closely and we are providing substantial assistance in close cooperation with the Ukrainian authorities.
Gas and electricity market reform is also one of the priority projects in the TACIS Action Programme 2000. I am glad that the report finds the main focus of the TACIS Programme for the Ukraine appropriate. The report has proposed enhanced attention to certain activities. I can confirm that a number of them are indeed being incorporated into both the TACIS Indicative Programme for 2000 to 2003 and the Ukraine Action Programme 2000. This goes for projects concerning institutional, legal and administrative reform as well as assistance for private sector development, economic development, development of NGOs and civil society.
Addressing the social consequences of transition in the health sector and the labour market is another important part of TACIS activities. So far our cooperation has concentrated mainly on technical assistance in the area of justice and home affairs. TACIS customs and border-crossing programmes are aimed at improving both operational capacity and the efficiency of customs and border controls to curb criminal activities.
More explicitly directed at combating organised crime is an anti-money laundering feasibility study which supports Ukraine's efforts to establish the necessary legislation and to create a financial intelligence unit. For the future, following frequent requests from the Ukrainian side, more attention will be paid to the eastern borders of Ukraine, to control better the influx of illegal migrants who seek to enter the Union illegally. I say to the honourable gentleman who spoke last in the debate that, as far as the overall purpose of the TACIS programmes is concerned, they do, of course, have to incorporate the ethical considerations, the democratic considerations, the market-oriented considerations to which he quite properly and quite eloquently referred."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples