Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-11-20-Speech-3-025"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20021120.1.3-025"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, the Commission work programme for 2003 is better presented than in the past. It is clearly based around important priorities and that is a point in its favour. The form, however, is still highly ambiguous. We are told that this programme will contribute to the Council’s annual operational programme for 2003, which the Council is due to subsequently adopt in December. But what is the exact status of the Commission’s contribution? Should the Council accept it as it is or does it have the right to amend it to introduce new priorities? Only the latter hypothesis is coherent with the hierarchy of the institutions. Naturally, we have no doubt that, in practice, dialogue within the institutional triangle will make it possible to iron out this problem. It nonetheless raises an important matter of principle.
The first priority of the Commission programme is essentially to prepare for enlargement. We cannot fail to be impressed, when reading the actions to be taken in this regard, by their sheer number, which shows the scale of the Community acquis to be implemented by the candidate countries. Having listened to the representatives of these countries yesterday, having heard their reactions, we can clearly see that these countries are keen to enter the Union. They want to become part of the European family and are ready to make a great deal of effort to accomplish that. We must not, however, exhaust them with excess legislation and authority. We must have the wisdom to let them work at their own pace and accept variable geometry to a greater extent.
The programme’s second priority is entitled ‘Stability and security’ and this presents in particular measures relating to immigration. Having read the list of key initiatives several times, I must say that I did find the initiative concerning integration of legal immigrants, but I am still looking for the initiative that was supposed to cover repatriation of illegal immigrants. If it is there, it is well hidden. This quite simply shows that the Commission still has a long way to go before realising the scale of the problem we are facing today.
On the other hand, in conclusion, we would like to convey our compliments on the paragraph entitled ‘Relations with the enlarged EU’s neighbours’, which Mr Prodi emphasised earlier. These relations must indeed be redefined and in this respect the Euro-Mediterranean partnership could lead to the creation of a new community, which, it must be said, would be separate from the current one. It would be more natural for Turkey to be a part of that community rather than be part of the European Union itself."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples