Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-10-23-Speech-3-011"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20021023.1.3-011"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, now that the Irish have voted in favour of the Treaty of Nice, the last political barriers to ratification of the Treaty have been overcome and the way to enlargement is open. I congratulate the Irish people on their decision. It demonstrates their openness and sense of responsibility.
The ten countries have made enormous progress in recent years. The Commission's Regular Reports presented recently make this abundantly clear, and I want to emphasise that these analyses were neither overindulgent nor overoptimistic. The Commission's confidence in the candidate countries is based on facts and thorough analysis. The progress already made is the guarantee that all ten countries will be ready for membership in early 2004, including in those areas where the work undertaken still – of course – needs to be completed.
Nonetheless, despite our total confidence in the candidate countries, the Commission has undertaken to monitor their final preparations and progress even after accession. To this end, we have prepared safeguard clauses for the internal market and justice and home affairs, which are the areas with regard to which our citizens have the most fears and the least confidence. The safeguard clauses will take effect should pledges given not be respected – an extremely unlikely scenario but one which is still possible, and we must make provision for it.
As you are aware, the key points that will be on the table in the debate between the Heads of State and Government relate to the financing of enlargement. These last remaining issues are nonetheless highly significant. The issue that meets with the broadest agreement is net transfers. There is clear unanimity on two principles: firstly, on accession, the ten candidate countries must not find themselves in the position of net contributors; and secondly, all expenditure commitments must fall within the strict limits set at Berlin. We have adhered to these two principles, and I therefore believe that it will not be difficult to reach agreement on the exact figure at Copenhagen.
As regards the Structural Funds, too, there appears to be growing consensus on an annual figure of around EUR 25.5 billion for 2004, 2005 and 2006. Frankly, we can hardly offer our new fellow citizens less. It will mean that the per capita amount received by the cohesion countries – the existing countries – will be EUR 231 in 2006 while the citizens of the new Member States will be entitled to EUR 137 per capita. I do not think we can make the discrepancy any wider than this.
Lastly, there is the issue of agricultural expenditure, with which we are all familiar. I know that some of the present Member States have reservations regarding the budgetary sustainability of these proposals and that they have asked for further guarantees. It is right to reflect on the Union’s future financial system – indeed, it is our duty. The Commission stands by its position: all our proposals are in line with the financial ceilings laid down at Berlin and are without prejudice to any future decisions.
On all the financial issues outstanding, I expect the Brussels European Council to give the Danish Presidency and the Commission a mandate to conclude the negotiations with a view to a final decision being taken at Copenhagen. On this I ask for your support.
Nevertheless – and this is a final addendum – the biggest effort we need to make in this last phase of the enlargement process is in the area of information. The latest Eurobarometer survey, published two days ago, tells us that half the current Union citizens are in favour of enlargement while one third are against. The remainder is neither for nor against. These figures are fairly reassuring in one sense but, in another, they give cause for concern: 65% of those surveyed think that enlargement will bring an increase in drugs trafficking, international organised crime and unemployment, which is exactly the opposite of what, on the basis of analyses, I genuinely believe will happen in the future.
Why, then, you may ask, should enlargement give rise to those fears? The answer lies in the last Eurobarometer figure: those who feel that they have been properly informed about enlargement make up only 21% of the population, whereas 79% feel that they have not received sufficient information. We clearly, therefore, need to make an effort to provide practical, sound, detailed information. Those who the statistics tell us do not feel well informed are not necessarily against enlargement – they tend to be indifferent. That, for me, however, is perhaps the most disturbing factor.
We must convince our fellow citizens that enlargement will bring solutions, not problems. That is why the Commission has launched an information campaign targeting both the present Member States and the candidate countries. The success of enlargement will depend on our ability to keep the public properly informed. We must not disappoint millions of Europeans in this respect. Indeed, the future of our Union depends on the enthusiasm, the vigour and the astuteness of our final endeavours to complete the process.
What is true for Ireland is true for us all. It is in all our interests that enlargement should proceed without delay. The forthcoming European Council in Brussels is therefore crucial. The debate will focus on our proposals regarding the ten candidate countries with which we recommend winding up negotiations by the end of the year. The date for the accession of Bulgaria and Romania and the next stage of Turkey's candidacy will also be discussed. The agenda will include the issue of Kaliningrad too. We may have the opportunity to review the international situation, focusing particularly on how best to continue combating terrorism in the light of the recent tragic events in Bali and the Philippines. We will also hear what the President of the European Convention has to report and we will hold our customary exchange of views with the President of the European Parliament.
The first item on the Council's agenda will therefore be enlargement. I would like to spell out once again the compelling reasons behind our recommendation to the Member States to conclude the negotiations with the ten countries. We have a historic and moral duty to share with our European neighbours the stability and prosperity we have built up over half a century of integration. Peace, stability, democracy and the rule of law are the essential ingredients for political stability. All this has worked very well for us in the past. It will work for the future Member States too.
Enlargement will extend European governance and standards to the entire continent. We expect to see a positive impact in very many areas: more efficient public administrations, more robust judicial systems, greater protection of minorities, more effective crime prevention, especially where cross-border crime is concerned, more stringent controls on illegal migration, enhanced monitoring of products on the market and, in particular, of food safety, and, lastly, stricter environmental standards.
The European Union’s greater size will increase its political potential on the world stage. This will bolster our policies in the fields of trade, financial markets, the environment and security. Europe will be in a better position to defend human rights and to help reduce the North-South divide. If we succeed in uniting faithfully and speaking with a single voice, we will be able to make a difference in issues such as climate change and managing the impact of globalisation.
On top of that, however, the first wave of ten new Member countries will bring enormous economic benefits for the Union as a
whole – for both current and future Member States. The increase in the Union’s population will strengthen the single market: the population will be increased by approximately 75 – 77 million, bringing the total number of citizens in the Union to 453 million. By way of comparison, consider that NAFTA – comprising the United States, Mexico and Canada – has a population of around 400 million.
Some say that, after the ten candidate countries join the European Union, the Union’s GDP will grow by only 4 or 5% while the population will increase by 20%. There is nothing negative in that. These statistics highlight the fact that we alone are achieving a process of democratic globalisation, even if only at regional level. They are by no means negative, for they are evidence of huge potential for growth, considering the trends displayed by these countries. Indeed, we must not forget that the ten candidate countries are already growing at a consistently higher rate than the present 15 Member States. Year on year, this was 2.4% in 2001 compared with 1.5% for the current European Union and a remarkable 4.1% in 2000 compared with our 3.4%. Most importantly, the ten candidate countries will bring highly qualified human resources to the Union. It is true that the enlargement countries will increase the Union’s population by 20% and its income by only 5%, but the percentage of science and engineering students graduating in these countries each year corresponds to 25% of our total. This is a resource which will contribute greatly to the increase in development.
Interpreting all these factors intelligently, we see that the candidate countries are our new frontier. European industry will have new scope for development and expansion because there will be a great need for new technologies and because the new Member States will provide a market for our goods and services.
Ladies and gentlemen, those are the benefits enlargement will bring. It is now time to address the remaining problems. First, however, I would like to make one minor general point: we must take great care not to jeopardise the success of enlargement by wrangling over details, as often happens in political decision-making. The unification of Europe must always take precedence over narrow sectoral and national interests. We need to concentrate on the larger picture and never lose sight of the opportunities I have just described."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples