Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-06-13-Speech-3-020"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20010613.1.3-020"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, the Gothenburg Summit will round off the Swedish Presidency which, as was mentioned previously, had an ambitious programme. I would like to give the Swedish government full marks for its work.
I would like to talk about something not on the programme for Gothenburg and that is one of the “E’s” – Employment – which was tackled at the Stockholm Summit in March, but which was supplemented in the social area this week with a hat trick of successes at the last moment. I would say that it was perhaps one of the most successful Council meetings in terms of social issues, as the Council managed to solve three issues: the issues of noise, equal treatment and, especially, informing and consulting employees. The work carried out was excellent and important for the EU’s ongoing social initiatives.
I would also like to mention sustainable development and link it to the social issues, as much of the debate has centred on sustainable development and ecological issues. This is the way it should be, but there is also a social dimension. We have the issues of social cohesion between people and creating policies which reduce the divisions in Europe, not least the divisions between the generations. We also have the issues of pension systems and how they will be developed in the future, and reducing the divisions between regions.
All this is required for sustainable development. We need an economic policy which is not simply focused on short-term growth, but also on long-term growth. Therefore, the ecological aspects must be included in all areas. They must have an impact on transport policy, energy policy and agricultural policy as we develop a society sustainable in the long term.
The ecological aspects must also have an impact on us globally. Internally, we will succeed in this through the methods we have used so far, but also through augmenting the Lisbon Process, by making the ecological aspects part of the process we already have in the social and economic areas. But we must also act globally. One opportunity will be the Gothenburg Summit and the summit with Mr Bush, at which the EU must stand its ground with regard to the Kyoto Protocol. Of course, we want the US on board, but the EU must take the lead here. Even if the US does not want this, the EU must take the lead globally on this issue. We must also focus on these issues with regard to trade agreements with the WTO by adding ecological and social aspects to the development of global trade.
Finally, I want to say something about the most important of the three “E’s”, which is undoubtedly Enlargement. This is an historic opportunity which we must not let slip through our fingers. I therefore share the view put forward by many others that, after what happened in Ireland, we must be even clearer in our dealings with the applicant countries. The enlargement process must continue, we must set deadlines with the aim of applicant countries being ready to take part in European Parliament elections in 2004. This must be clarified so that the first countries can join. Each country must join on its own merits and as few exceptions and transposition periods as possible must be requested in as few areas as possible. Sweden has achieved a great deal of success during its Presidency. Now the focus must be on further progress and building on this legacy.
Finally, I would also like to say something about the common European foreign and security policy, on which the Presidency has worked very well and for which Sweden has received great praise. Anna Lindh in particular has succeeded in positioning Sweden as a leading nation in this process by introducing preventive measures. The fact that we now have a leading role in world politics, in the Middle East, Korea, etc., is to a large extent thanks to the work of Anna Lindh, for which I would like to thank her.
I believe that it was good to be so clear on the issue of a convention. As it supports openness, Sweden must also support a convention, but not as the
method, but as
method of preparing intergovernmental negotiations next time."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples