Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-10-24-Speech-3-053"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20011024.1.3-053"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, Mr President-in-Office of the Council, ladies and gentlemen, I would like to make a few comments on this debate, which has revealed great unity, not just between Council and Commission but also between these institutions and Parliament.
My intention in saying this is not to interfere in other people’s business but to stress the need for effectiveness. We need to bring all our work out into the open and achieve more transparency, accountability and democracy in our governance. The Commission has already addressed this point in its White Paper and we and Parliament expect to debate it with the Council.
With regard to the economy, everyone has stressed the difficulty of implementing the Lisbon decisions. However, this is an area in which there has been a vast difference between the general decisions taken and the implementation of the decisions in subsequent individual Councils, with regard to liberalisation and market reform, speeding up innovation, and projects ranging from the creation of the single air space to the establishing of the Community patent, areas in which we are still extremely behind schedule. Our economy will only become dynamic if we rectify these shortcomings.
Lastly – and, in this respect, more great progress has been made – we have undertaken to support the introduction of the euro with the indispensable backup measures such as the single market in cross-border bank transfers. We have committed ourselves to this and it is an absolutely crucial point.
Finally, one last point on the subject of the Convention. I will go back to Mrs Maij-Weggen’s comment on the actual definition of the Convention: we cannot consider it to be a consultative body, as some have described it. It cannot be a body which just gives advice and is then disbanded and no longer involved. We are making the Convention as transparent as possible but also giving it as much democratic authority as possible, and we therefore expect it to produce major, incisive results. I would add, moreover, that the presence of the Convention is a breath of fresh air amongst the closed doors of secretive diplomacy. The air of democracy is nourished by the oxygen of transparency and accountability, and the Commission therefore fully supports the commencement of the Convention’s work so that dialogue will, at last, be opened between the institutions and between the institutions and the European citizens.
I would just like to focus on a few issues which appear to have remained unresolved. Firstly, the issue has been raised, starting with Chairman Poettering, of the amount of aid granted to refugees. I would like to say that the immediate appropriation has been decided of EUR 315 million, but the problem is not now, at this time, I regret to say, financial, but the enormous practical difficulties of getting the aid to the people concerned. We are working through the NGOs and many other organisations. I would stress that, as things stand now, sufficient funds have been transferred in practical terms. When further funds are needed, then we will come back here to request them and discuss the matter together: the present problem is the difficulty of implementing these operations.
I will now turn to another debate, taken up by a number of speakers, including Mr Tajani and several others, who linked this major phenomenon of the world being divided into two parts to peace in Palestine. This is an issue of fundamental importance, in which regard I would point out to Mr Tajani and the other speakers that what has been termed the ‘reconstruction plan for Palestine’ is something which is very much on our minds: I have discussed it many times with Mr Peres and we are well aware that we should concentrate on taking action in certain sectors such as water, energy, infrastructure and revitalising industry. This is our duty and the Palestinian and Israeli citizens know that the Commission is focusing its efforts in that direction. As soon as the political conditions allow, we will be here, requesting the necessary resources. However, I believe that the knowledge that we are taking practical action and are all ready to work together is in itself conducive to peace.
Then, Prime Minister Verhofstadt spoke about the decisions adopted in the field of justice and the fight against financial crime. I agree with what he said, but we must be careful. We have adopted decisions here: if we do not implement them we will lose all credibility. Therefore, the ministers responsible must speed up the implementation of these decisions or else they will be taken again at the summit.
A further point related to the Convention. A general agreement has been adopted on the board, the executive structure and so forth. I would, however, like to focus on one point, touched upon by Prime Minister Verhofstadt, which is the duration of the Convention. Parliament and the Commission have guided and supported the Convention’s creation: they must support its work and they must support its conclusion, and so the work must reach its conclusion before the start of the electoral campaign for the European elections. This is a genuine deadline, not a theoretical one.
Many speakers have brought up the issue of the Community method in this debate. Well then, on this matter I would simply like to borrow a vivid picture painted by Mr Duff. He said: “When the two planes crashed into the World Trade Centre they demolished more than the twin towers. We also saw the destruction of the European Union's three pillars contrived at the Treaty of Maastricht.” This is, in my opinion, a correct, responsible, practical observation. Mr Duff has fully understood the political meaning of the Commission’s efforts to achieve unified Union action by applying the Community method, which is the only effective way of ensuring success.
A further point, mentioned by all the speakers, is the issue of the institutional reforms. The Commission and Parliament are working on the practical aspects of this matter: we have argued and helped each other, and I think we are making progress – painstaking progress – in our joint work. We have not yet finished but we are working, so to speak, on the bricks and mortar, on the concrete facts. At this point, although I do not wish to interfere with the internal organisation of the Council, I would point out that our reform will not be sufficiently effective if it is not accompanied by a reform of the Council’s working procedures."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples