Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-10-24-Speech-3-046"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2001-10-24"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:European Council meeting (Ghent, 19 October 2001)2
dcterms:Language	"nl"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20011024.1.3-046"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2001-10-24-Speech-3-0472
lpv:speaker	lp:Hanja Maij-weggen2
lpv:spokenAs	member_of_the_bureau; EPP-ED (1999-10-12--2002-03-07)3 substitute; Committee on Foreign Affairs, Human Rights, Common Security and Defence Policy (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 member; Members from the European Parliament to the Joint Parliamentary Assembly of the Agreement between the African, Caribbean and Pacific States and the European Union (ACP-EU) (1999-09-14--2002-01-14)3 member; AFCO (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 unknown; Christen Democratisch Appèl (1999-07-20--2003-09-30)3 substitute; Committee on Women's Rights and Equal Opportunities (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, the impression which our citizens have gleaned from the European Council of Ghent is rather chaotic: a closed down city, three major countries making prior arrangements, an angry Belgian President, disparate final declarations by Heads of Government and, to finish off, an angry Commission President. At a time when unity of action is vital, Europe is divided. I should like to make three observations. The United Kingdom, Germany and France have lent their full support to the United States. In fact, the UK is even granting active military support. I welcome this. Other EU countries that are also members of NATO are providing more passive support. The EU countries that are not NATO members lend political support via diplomatic channels. These are three different kinds of support without any clear interrelation for the citizen. And then the EU President asked for an evaluation. So you, in fact, put a seed of doubt into our minds as to whether that support would last. Against this backdrop, it is hardly surprising that the United States is seeking support from countries outside the European Union, including Canada, Australia and the Pacific Association. I would call for more coordination in Europe’s support for the actions against terrorism in the coming months, so that the image of division will soon be one of the past. Secondly, I should like to comment on cooperation in the field of internal security. Commissioner Vitorino has tabled the proposals extremely promptly, and these include one about a European regulation against money laundering, one concerning arrest warrants and one harmonising penalties. In fact, those proposals had already partly been tabled. Last week, the Council of Ministers for Internal Affairs failed to reach agreement. That was also the case for the European Council in Ghent. Why did the Heads of Government fail to make those executive decisions? Surely it is hardly justifiable vis-à-vis the citizens for the EU to be undecided about anti-terrorism measures at home. Then there is the convention, which receives my support, because the Council has adopted the wish of the European Parliament and my group for a convention with a broad parliamentary basis. We are less happy about the proposal to ask the convention to supply options. That is the type of question you might ask a consultancy bureau, but not a parliamentary body. Let the convention determine its own working method and submit its own proposals. That worked for the Charter and, in my opinion, will work again now."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph