Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-01-16-Speech-3-062"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20020116.6.3-062"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, Mr President-in-Office of the Council, Mr President of the Commission, ladies and gentlemen, the Spanish Presidency has come at a time of international difficulty and it must therefore deal with highly topical issues. In order to deal with these issues, as you said, Mr Aznar, we will need ‘more Europe’.
Mr Aznar, we must construct an area of freedom, justice and security for the citizens, while fully respecting the democratic traditions of our countries and the fundamental human rights embodied in our Charter. There is no place for terrorism in this area. Terrorism is our enemy, but neither should there be room for repressive laws or measures which bear no relation to this fight and which contribute to reducing the legal and judicial guarantees of our citizens. The construction of this area of freedom must also be an opportunity to achieve a very high degree of harmonisation of legal guarantees.
In the field of foreign, security and defence policy, Mr President-in-Office of the Council, I am going to make a few very specific comments in order to be brief. The Spanish Presidency has the responsibility to ensure that the European Union and the European Parliament, in cooperation with the Spanish Presidency, take a decisive step in terms of seeking a just solution in the Middle East. We believe that we should make it very clear that the decisions of the United Nations and of international law should be respected and that Israel’s illegal and military occupation of the Palestinian State should cease.
We should welcome the intention to continue improving the Barcelona process, which is currently in stalemate. A genuine regional integration of the countries on the Southern shores of the Mediterranean is necessary. The development of the region cannot be based solely on the aid and commercial concessions provided by the European Union, established individually with each of the Mediterranean countries.
More Europe means playing our proper role in regional stabilisation and promoting the economic development of our neighbouring areas. Accordingly, the initiative of creating the Euro-Mediterranean Development Bank seems to us to be a positive one. But, while perhaps complicating the issue, Mr Aznar, the Morocco-Sahara conflict must be resolved through the calling of the referendum on self-determination, as agreed in the United Nations. We believe that the position taken by the Spanish Government on this problem, in accordance with Spain’s responsibility towards the Saharan people and international law, is commendable.
The Spanish Presidency should direct its greatest efforts towards Central America, particularly at this crucial time, with the acute crisis in Colombia and the collapse of the Argentine economy. The European Parliament unanimously supported the negotiated solution to the long conflict suffered by Colombia, disassociating itself from the militarisation of the United States’ proposal, the Colombia Plan. In these tragic times, the authoritative voice of the European Union may be decisive in terms of consolidating talks between the government and the guerrilla movement. We hope, Mr Aznar, that you will act accordingly. The Belgian Presidency has taken significant steps in normalising relations with Cuba, by beginning to overcome the so-called common position, which is more suited to the Cold War than to present times.
Mr Aznar, my political group has strongly supported the Convention. We would have liked the participation in it to be more pluralist, but in any event, we are convinced of its importance. The Spanish Presidency has said that the issues dealt with by the Convention must be very open and that its agreements and conclusions should inform the future decisions of the Intergovernmental Conference and the Treaty of 2004.
Mr Aznar, you will note that I have described a landscape of positive and negative positions. You can count on the cooperation of the humble group I represent within my political group on all those positive issues.
The introduction of the euro has created a new reality. The most important task, Mr Aznar, is to supplement the euro in the economic and social fields. You have expressed your intention to carry out what you call new economic reforms. In the language of the Confederal Group of the European United Left/Nordic Green Left, this means promoting the social aspects of European integration in a decisive manner and strengthening economic and social cohesion. We believe that Europe is not going to improve its economic cohesion and development by means of policies of liberalisation and privatisation, by means of employment deregulation which endangers jobs and by reducing levels of social protection and by tax reforms which make fiscal systems less sufficient and less progressive.
Furthermore, Mr Aznar, the international economic situation demands imagination and flexibility. We believe that we should not confront it shackled by a rigorous and excessively restrictive notion of the stability pact. The fact that the world economy is now close to recession is beyond question, Mr Aznar. The European Union needs political impetus and democratisation of its economic decision-making. We need budgets geared towards employment and economic and social cohesion. The stability pact must be made more flexible and at least preserve public investment when there are excessive deficits, and this is an expenditure which is an essential element for the future development of the Union and also, in the short term, an element which will increase and stimulate economic activity. It is essential to supplement the single currency with a process of harmonisation in the fiscal, employment and social fields, building a genuine economic policy – not just monetary – and making decisive progress towards a social Europe. Lastly, Mr Aznar, it worries us that there is no attempt to strengthen public services, which would reflect a social view of European integration.
Many fashionable reforms in our countries put an end to public monopolies in strategic sectors, only to convert them in many cases into private oligopolies, which makes them difficult to control publicly and which does not lead to any real increase in efficiency. I could cite various examples in different countries concerning rail transport, health systems or electrical supplies. Therefore, Mr Aznar, in summary, we believe that the Barcelona Summit should reflect this type of concern and adopt a much more dynamic and stronger view of European social integration.
You will recognise, as I do, that, on this issue, I am obviously expressing the existing differences, as you know, between our different political forces. Of course, Mr Aznar, the negotiations on the bases of the enlargement agreement – as the Spanish Presidency has said, and I agree with it – must be concluded during this six-month period. Otherwise, enlargement will not be possible in 2004.
In this regard, Mr Aznar, I would like to make the following comment: a Union of 27 States – with enlargement to a further 10 States – will increase the surface area of the European Union by 34%, it will increase the population by more than 28%, but the Community income will increase by barely 5%. Do we really appreciate the political challenge posed by enlargement? Do we really appreciate the degree to which social problems may be exacerbated as a result of enlargement? In the current European Union, 16% of the population have a per capita income which is 90% lower than the Community average, and in the Union of 27 States, for example, this proportion would rise to 34%.
We therefore believe that for the first time, unlike what happened with the so-called Delors packages, where in successive enlargements of the area of the internal market there were firm commitments in relation to decisive increases in economic and social cohesion, we are now in a situation in which economic and social cohesion – as was expressed in the Delors packages – must be thoroughly strengthened and increased. We would therefore like an unequivocal signal in this regard.
It is possible that the agricultural negotiation will end with the implementation of a transitional period that will go beyond the deadline of 2006. The problem will be what to do next. Agriculture, like any economic activity, requires prospects and the negotiation should be accompanied by clear signals on the future of the agricultural policy, where we will surely hear requests from some people for the dismantling of common policies for the sake of budgetary savings. Others believe that the common policies should not be dismantled, but rather strengthened in certain areas, such as food safety and environmental concerns, which should be incorporated into all our Community policies.
The question of the structural funds brings into focus – as I said in relation to the Delors packages – the future political shape of the European Union. A larger European Union will require greater efforts to increase economic and social cohesion between the regions."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples