Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-07-03-Speech-3-019"
Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
---|---|
rdf:type | |
dcterms:Date | |
dcterms:Is Part Of | |
dcterms:Language | |
lpv:document identification number |
"en.20020703.2.3-019"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. Mr President-in-Office of the Council, you know what my group thinks because you were kind enough to invite all the chairmen to Copenhagen and I believe you raised the issue at the end of your speech in the correct way, providing a historical view of the challenge we have before us. In this respect, I must say that I believe this is a good political approach. I hope that the Danish Presidency will act with neutrality, as was the case last time Denmark held the Presidency.
…and in Seville you have had to give the Interior Ministers homework with deadlines.
Mr President, a brief reference to global responsibility. You are right to raise global security. It concerns me very much as well and I would like you to disown the statements of your Foreign Minister in which he states that the approach of the Quartet and the International Conference on the Middle East makes no sense. This has been approved by Parliament, it is a European Union position and it appears in the Seville conclusions. We believe that unilateral action by the United States is not the way to resolve this conflict.
Finally – and I will end here, Mr President – aware that the Convention we are preparing is a challenge for next year, I would like to know what you think: are you in favour of the Community method or the cabinet-based method?
Thank you very much and good luck.
We must not lose hope that, respecting the decisions of the Danish people, you will also be fully committed to European integration. That would be good for everybody.
With regard to the challenges we have before us, the essential challenge is enlargement. I would repeat that we should approach it as the historic challenge for Europeans to achieve one Europe. Parliament is doing everything it can to ensure enlargement takes place within the agreed timescales. I was surprised by the statements by your Foreign Minister threatening to take a stick to the candidate countries if they do not behave properly. I do not know whether the transcription in the press is correct. But in any event, I would accept that you have a Herculean task, because – Parliament has said this about previous enlargements – we cannot make a leap of this type without reconsidering things. We cannot go from fifteen countries to twenty-five by negotiating for a fortnight and without dealing with budgetary issues at all. That is why you are having problems with the Council. You are also going to need a stick to impose order within the Council.
I must say, since Mr Poettering is so determined to systematically bring the German election campaign into our debates, that we can argue about agriculture, but please tell Mr Stoiber not to bring up the Beneš Decrees all the time, since these bombshells are much more dangerous in Europe.
Therefore, Prime Minister, since the tales of your fellow countryman Andersen are so beautiful, do not let this tale end in a nightmare. I wish you lots of luck, but you have a very difficult job. And this relates to food safety, because what we have now is a hyper-capitalist agricultural policy that is constantly seeking to achieve higher productivity. We have had the political courage to debate it. We want an agricultural policy which is aimed at sustainable development, but we cannot say that that will be discussed later and we are going to wait four years. That is the challenge facing you.
With regard to fisheries, we also have to create a sustainable development policy, but applying human principles and respecting the social fabric and cohesion, which I am sure we all agree on. I must point out that you are a fishing power, since you fish more than anyone else in the Community.
With regard to security, justice and freedom, all I will say is that we support the fight against terrorism and organised crime. We are very concerned because your government is pursuing a policy on asylum which has been criticised by the United Nations High Commission for Refugees. Furthermore, you have not included Tampere in your programme; you only refer to Seville. In the work implementing Tampere we have five outstanding directives on the table…"@en1
|
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples