Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-09-04-Speech-2-118"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20010904.7.2-118"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President – unfortunately I cannot greet the Council yet, although I have a number of things to say with it in mind – Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, amidst the squabbling over direct aid in agriculture or the future allocation of the Structural Funds, we sometimes lose sight of the fact that the project to heal our divided Europe is of historical importance and that its significance is such that it also determines Europe's standing in the world. More fainthearted talk of delay not only harms the project but also Europe as a whole. That is why I would call on the Council, together with Parliament and the Commission, to do all it can to ensure that the first new members are able to take part in the European elections in 2004. Given the current state of play in the negotiations, we are realistically talking about 10 countries. This also means that not just one Baltic country but all three will be involved. Should enlargement be delayed further then there is also the danger that the negative implications of this for the people in our own countries will cause problems. Even now the fact that increasing numbers of firms are relocating to neighbouring countries in the East because of environmental and social dumping is intolerable.
The EU's environmental and social standards can only be upheld, however, if there is actual membership. I will give just one example from Latvia: I think it is incredible that EU companies can permit themselves to boycott the social dialogue while the Commission simply stands by and watches. In any case, it is a characteristic of the enlargement process that the people's existing rights of participation play no part in it. Why are we surprised at the diminishing interest of the people in the accession countries if enlargement is practically solely a project of the political elite?
Mr Verheugen, you mentioned the positive attitude of the national minorities towards enlargement. I cannot say the same for the Russian minority in Latvia. No debate of any kind is taking place in society about the successes achieved and problems experienced either in the accession process or with enlargement; neither is it a joint process. The communication strategy is to have separate projects for East and West and as such is ill-conceived even in terms of structure. It prevents people from getting to know each other. How many people in the West are aware of the European treasures in the Baltic cultures; how many know anything about what is of significance there? In our countries it goes without saying that projects in rural and urban areas are developed by the stakeholders. In the accession countries it is a Commission-led top-down process. Why do they not attach any importance to having the same quality of participation as is demanded here by the Member States? In Latvia too the administration is the weakest point and of course an administration is only strong if it offers a service facility to all of its citizens, regardless of their social standing and language. It needs to be able to organise and implement procedures to allow them to participate.
As a predominantly rural country, Latvia is particularly affected by the foolhardy project to export the EU's unsuccessful agricultural policy to the accession countries. Surely we all need to work together to convert direct aid into ecologically and socially sustainable structural development. It would be beneficial not only to Latvia but also to consumer protection and thus to the entire population of the EU and the accession countries. I should like to stress once more that in this whole process the social dimension is being wholly neglected. It is illusory to believe that processes of transformation in society can be managed by free market forces alone. We cannot ignore the alarming gulf between rich and poor. But we could reduce it if the idea of Europe were understood as a common political task for the people of Europe regardless of their region and social position."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples