Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-05-14-Speech-2-203"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20020514.10.2-203"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, I should like to add my voice to those of all the speakers who have thanked Mrs Hoff and expressed their admiration for her work and for her physical presence here having been so seriously ill.
I genuinely believe that Mrs Hoff’s report is a fine example of the essential contribution that the European Parliament makes to the work of the institutions. Commissioner Patten rightly stated that the substance of this report will guide and inspire us in our relations with Russia. The Presidency takes the same view. Consequently, I should like to express my gratitude for this important work, which is often carried out quietly and anonymously, because it is right that sometimes, such as now, it should step into the limelight and be publicly acknowledged.
I wish to say that I agree with practically all the opinions that have been expressed here on all the aspects, both positive and negative, of our relationship with Russia. These relations are as they are and not as we would like them to be. Russia, with all its advantages and with all its disadvantages, is a great country, with which we share a common area: the great European plain. It is, furthermore, a country with which, due to the special historical circumstances in which the Union now has to live, and by this I mean the end of the cold war, the fall of the Berlin wall, enlargement towards the countries of the east that were previously satellites of Russia, for which the Second World War was to blame as were we, since we left many of these countries – and our historical conscience pricks us about this – under Russia’s influence.
We now have to make up this lost ground and we are doing so with enlargement, which consists of integrating into the great European family all these countries that were cruelly separated from it. At the same time, however, Russia is there and, consequently, Russia is no longer the distant Eastern adversary of the bipolar world that it once was. Russia is now our neighbour. Once enlargement takes place, we will have to share not only borders, but also, as in the case of Kaliningrad, we will have to share responsibilities, because, regardless of their nationality, the inhabitants of Kaliningrad are human beings about whom we must be concerned because we are committed to this city’s not becoming a pocket of poverty tacked onto the Union, but a pocket of prosperity. Creating an area of prosperity and leaving, for example, a pocket of poverty in Kaliningrad has no place in the European Union’s scale of values.
Similarly, we want to see Russia make progress in all areas, at both the economic and commercial level and at the legal and institutional level and also in relation to respect for the great humanist principles, for human rights and for the Rule of Law, that are our badge of identity. This is why we have to work on all areas, increasing, as best we can, our cooperation with Russia in the economic and commercials spheres. Also, as we have already stated, within the third pillar, we have already made significant progress, by holding meetings between Russian and EU Ministers of Justice and Home Affairs and on the issue of respect for human rights.
I have not mentioned Chechnya, because a sitting was dedicated almost entirely to this issue last month and I should like to remind Mr Staes that if he wants to know what the Presidency’s position on Chechnya is, he should attend the sittings or read the Minutes of this Parliament, because it is unacceptable for us to hold a debate on Chechnya lasting hours, for the Presidency and the Commission to state their position and the following month for someone to claim that we are saying nothing on the matter. Mr Staes had the opportunity to be here and to participate in this debate if he had so wished. If he was not present, it is neither my fault nor that of the Presidency, but his own.
I would say the same to Mrs Thors, who has been reproaching the Presidency. I should like to remind her that her country of origin, Finland
held the Presidency of the Union a short while ago and I should also like to remind her that Spain was actually the first country, at Presidency level, to visit Kaliningrad. I would also remind her that we are a very long way from Kaliningrad, unlike Finland, which lies just opposite that city. Consequently, if any reproaches are to be made on these matters, they should be fair ones. We have done all that we could, in excellent cooperation with the Commission, which is doing an admirable job, and with which we have had an excellent relationship. I believe that we are making great efforts to take steps forward with Russia, steps that are sometimes smaller, sometimes larger, but little by little we are building a relationship and frankly, I do not think there are currently grounds for reproaching anyone."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples