Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-10-24-Speech-3-020"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20011024.1.3-020"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Madam President, I should like to begin – as other colleagues have done today – with a reference to the milestone event in Northern Ireland. The verified decommissioning of IRA weapons has been a necessary and required act for a considerable period of time. It was long overdue, but now that it has happened, it is hugely welcome. Particularly since 11 September it has been increasingly inevitable that such an act should take place. I hope it represents a new dawn, a rebirth, a renaissance for the peace process in Northern Ireland and that all the political actors will now seize this moment to ground and root the peace in the institutions of that agreement. I add my voice to those who have asked all the institutions today, in the clearest terms, to welcome what has happened on behalf of the European Union.
I want to say to Prime Minister Verhofstadt, with regard to the Ghent Council, that my group totally supports the clearest and most unequivocal assurances you have given of total solidarity with the United States. That is an important act of solidarity, and an important point of departure. I reiterate, for my group, that we totally support this. If I do not dwell on this, it is simply because there are one or two questions I should like to raise with you, Mr President-in-Office.
In particular, we have had rather a long debate about the potential humanitarian crisis. Clearly for areas within control of the Taliban, we cannot blame the world community for Taliban unwillingness to engage with the United Nations, NGOs and others. But I would like to know what specific initiatives we, as the European Union, with our commitment of resources in this area, are now taking to urge Pakistan to open more space for refugees. I appreciate the enormous difficulties. I appreciate they already have two million or more Afghanis within their territory, but can we not, with our financial and organisational capacity, reassure those authorities that if the borders are opened to cope with this crisis they will not be left alone or have to pick up the tab on their own?
I should like to turn to the question of the role of the Council of Ministers in following up on the action plan to fight terrorism. In particular, I note the strategic leadership which you offered through the Council at the extraordinary meeting on 21 September. There you made a clear plea to the institutions to seize that moment and act. Here I congratulate the Commission for taking the European Council at its word and bringing forward with extraordinary speed a comprehensive measure to freeze the assets of terrorist organisations.
I can tell you in this Parliament that within 24 hours of receiving that, and with the proviso that we should review it in the lifetime of this Parliament, we too seized the moment. That had no precedent ever in European law making. It was with some regret then that one noticed that, if there was a delay, it was among your ‘line managers’ from the European Council down to the Council of Ministers.
I have a number of questions: What is the Council doing on the freezing of assets? But I have an important question around it. Can you explain to me, Prime Minister, what does this mean about the quality of governance in the European Union? After all, the Council is there to give a strategic lead. You gave it, the Commission followed; this House followed. The question is: Why did the Council of Ministers not follow with the same alacrity?
I would like to pose one other question in relation to the Convention. The Prime Minister has explained to us that the candidate states will participate. I very much welcome that. I ask the Prime Minister to clarify, in the light of the agreement at Helsinki, that all candidate countries will be treated on an equal basis. Does that invitation extend to Turkey? It is important that Turkey should be included, based on the principles clarified at Helsinki. I know it is not a negotiating state, but Helsinki established a clear principle of equality of treatment for candidate states.
To summarise: What will we do with Pakistan and humanitarian aid? What does the example of the freezing of assets tell us about the rather dysfunctional quality of governance? Will Turkey be a participant in the process?
Finally, I am glad to see that the President of the Commission and the President-in-Office, today at least, are sharing a platform in the European Parliament."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples