Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-07-03-Speech-2-015"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20010703.1.2-015"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Madam President, it is unfortunate that today’s debate on the Swedish presidency – which was of course something new for our country, with all that that entails – has to begin with an observation that it is in danger of being remembered for stone-throwing anarchists trying to stop the meeting and ruthlessly smashing up Göteborg’s pleasant main street and, with it, quite a few good intentions.
The advantages and benefits to people of cooperation were pushed into the background, while violence and hooliganism came to dominate the reports from the meeting. I know that almost everyone here in the Chamber shares the regret I feel, but it would have been safer for the future of democracy if we could have been in complete agreement.
The Swedish presidency ought instead to be remembered for the efforts made regarding enlargement. Securing European freedom and democracy and extending it to include former Communist-occupied Eastern and Central Europe is the absolutely most important task of European cooperation. Hand in hand with this goes a growing debate in which the major issues for the future of European cooperation are presented. Sometimes, the talk is more of how the decision-making processes are to be organised than of
we are to cooperate on and what the EU must not meddle in. I believe that we all too often talk above people’s heads and at a far remove from their everyday lives.
Ireland’s ‘no’ to the Treaty of Nice is a lesson for us all and a worry not only for the Irish government. The debate concerning the EU’s future must be conducted in more fundamental and more principled terms. What we say and do here is therefore of less importance than our engaging in greater discussion in our constituencies.
In my own country, if I may take it as an example, it is important now to make the most of the interest aroused by the presidency. As the prime minister also mentioned, there now exists the opportunity to conduct a debate on the future of Europe that engages people’s interest. This means that Sweden must now also tackle the issue of the euro. The common currency is so central to EU cooperation that the Social Democratic Party and the Swedish government must take their share of responsibility for Sweden’s becoming a member of EMU.
In other countries, there are other issues which must be brought into focus. I think it is important for Europhiles to stand up for a Europe which is more open to the surrounding world and in which free markets prevail. In a number of Member States, Europhiles should take greater responsibility for the fact that enlargement is now becoming a reality.
Since the Swedish presidency was making every effort to be a presidency for the whole of the European Union, what was most important was that we obtain a breakthrough in the enlargement negotiations. The fact that this did not happen with greater enthusiasm and greater courage is not, in the first place, the fault of the Swedish presidency. It was others who were putting the brakes on. I therefore hope that the results achieved through the negotiations have advanced the cause of successful enlargement and that the thorniest issues which are still outstanding – agricultural and regional policy – do not upset or interfere with the decisions taken in Göteborg concerning dates. Let us ensure that these practical achievements loom larger than the stone-throwing and hooliganism on the part of the left-wing extremists. Let us all work together to ensure that the parliament of the street does not win out."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples