Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-11-06-Speech-3-174"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20021106.13.3-174"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, let me just begin by briefly outlining the most important points of my report again. I would like to say straight away that these points are nothing new. Many of these have already been discussed here before, but there are a number of issues that deserve additional emphasis. In the first place, aid granted to the countries of the Western Balkans needs to be linked to support. This is not the first time that this has been said, but I believe that it has to be stressed again. Cooperation with the international war tribunal at The Hague is not something which all countries can simply agree to and subsequently act as if that agreement does not exist. That is, and that ought to be, a genuine concrete condition which must be in place and continue to be for the granting of support. The same applies to another subject – the return of refugees – to which everyone agrees, but where practice has shown in this respect too that many countries do not deliver what they have promised or do not do what they ought to be doing.
More of the same is no longer enough. There is no point in having more and more sessions with the same people discussing the same policies. A genuine change of direction has to take place and this has to happen quickly. I am strongly in favour of such action and I make an appeal to the Commission and to each of us, the Members of this Parliament, to sit with each other and see what is now necessary for the Balkans. What we have done up till now has been successful but it is not sufficient for the future.
Finally, let us look at the fight against corruption and crime. Many fine words have also been uttered in this context, but unfortunately in practice it is shown that corruption continues to occur as far up as at government level, for example the last government in Macedonia. The European Union cannot continue to inject money into that region while that is going on.
Another point in my report is the need to gain an insight into what will be the future of Kosovo. We cannot have the situation where Kosovo continues to exist whilst the Kosovans want something else, but we just hang onto the 1999 UN resolution. I do not have the solution, I do not know whether I am for independence or self-reliance, but I think that it is up to the European Union to start the discussion.
Finally, two more points which Parliament is absolutely right to ask for, time and again, and which need attention. The first is the necessity to prepare education at all levels for a non-ethnic future. The school books are nothing to write home about. They are continuing to repeat the old patterns. That is not acceptable; it is the breeding ground for fresh conflict. Secondly, it is clear again, from all the elections, how important it is for the media to be independent. In almost all of the countries, the media play a disappointing role in the establishment of democracy and that must be brought to an end.
I am going quickly through the points because I feel they are important issues – that have already been brought to the fore earlier by Parliament but not, unfortunately, looked at in sufficient depth. I am aware of the dangers to some extent and I would be keen to have an open discussion about these points with other Members and also with the Commission. We all, including the Commission and Parliament, run the risk of being hidebound by a pattern, a way of thinking and working with the Balkans which arose in the nineties, based on the greatest dangers which existed then. These were extreme nationalism and ethnic hatred. Although these problems have not yet disappeared, I believe that the situation has changed so much that the greatest problems now in our considerations and our way of thinking about the Balkans are not getting the attention they deserve. In my opinion, the relevant problems are economic and social crises, stagnation and a growing disappointment with the effects of democracy. At this very moment, there is the risk that our interest in the Western Balkans is waning. I only have to point out that we are sitting here in a Chamber that is almost empty. When we discuss enlargement, the room is full, when we discuss the Western Balkans, there is just a handful of people, the usual suspects, who are prepared to speak on this issue – and Europe simply carries on. This cannot continue; the European Union can no longer afford this.
The budget for the Balkans is falling, from 900 million a few years ago to 500 million in 2005. This is why I was so impressed with a report which I have just received, entitled
from the
. This sets out in minute detail what the problems are now and what potential solutions the European Union should find to deal with them. One crucial observation is that the period of reconstruction is over. This has been reasonably successful and the EU has achieved a certain amount of success with it but now something else is needed. Industry has been decimated or allowed to decay. Many small businesses have grown in its place but have not been able to solve the problem of unemployment and there are absolutely no prospects for large sections of the population. Pursuant to this report, which I broadly support, what should that mean for the European Union, the Commission and Parliament?
I think that we must learn from the successes of the structural and cohesion funds. These have been successful in southern Europe and I think that the time has come to apply the methodology and the approach of the structural and cohesion funds also to the countries of the Western Balkans.
For example, this would mean that the agency for reconstruction that we have had up until now ought to be turned into an agency for development. This will also have to mean that, after the current enlargement by ten countries, the remaining candidate member states and the countries of the Western Balkans will be brought together into one DG, because the problems of Bulgaria and Romania are not essentially any different to those of the Western Balkans.
It will also have to mean that part of the pre-accession monies, which is soon only available for Romania and Bulgaria, can also be spent on the Balkans."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
"European Stability Initiative"1
"Western Balkans 2004"1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples