Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-12-04-Speech-3-034"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20021204.3.3-034"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, Mr President-in-Office of the Council, ladies and gentlemen, changes and developments are now occurring on at least a daily, even an hourly, basis, and so the picture I can give you at the moment is only a snapshot of that moment. It prompts a number of observations on the subject of Copenhagen.
For a start, we have not yet reached the objective. There are still very considerable differences in outlook between the Member States and the candidate countries, and any real result in Copenhagen will demand abundant political courage, far-sightedness, and a great deal of leadership. I am of course glad to hear it said that we are dealing here with an historic dimension, which must not be allowed to be brought down by this or that detail. Do you think I do not know that? But even great and historic projects have to be paid for, everything has to be done decently and in order, and we have to get through the difficulties in which we find ourselves at the moment. I am confident, though, that the Heads of State and Government will indeed weigh up the risks we would run if we did not achieve a result, and the concessions that might still be required in Copenhagen.
Secondly, it is important that Copenhagen should not be overloaded, and I am saying this to the future Member States, whom I earnestly urge to do their utmost to sort out the many bilateral issues and leftovers from the negotiations by the beginning of next week, which I think they have a very good chance of being able to do. But I am also addressing the Member States, who must resist the temptation to tie the great decision on enlargement to the advancement of certain national interests. It is with a certain amount of concern that I see the first attempts being made at wrapping up packages that are not appropriate.
Thirdly, we have to achieve an outcome in which there are no winners or losers. Those who think in terms of winners and losers will fail. We have to achieve an outcome in which there are only winners, one in which the principal victor is Europe as a whole. So everyone should be aware that the proposal from the Presidency that is now on the table, which was worked out together with the Commission and is fully endorsed by it as it stands, is a fair and even-handed offer to the Member States. Although it is now the accession of ten states that we are now organising rather than the six planned in Berlin in 1999, the Danish proposal is over EUR 2 billion below the upper limit laid down in Berlin. This gives the candidate countries an argument when they ask how it is that it is suddenly no longer possible to make the funds available that, in 1999, were considered appropriate for six countries, even though we now have ten countries to deal with. That is an argument that is not easy to counter, and so I hope that there will be some movement here.
I really have to tell you that one problem is the result, quite simply, of the rules we have made for the European Union. The new Member States will have to pay full contributions from the very outset, but, as you know, the flow of funds is very slow, and it is subject to certain rules. Not only do we have the problem of having to prevent new members from becoming net contributors; we also have the additional problem that we may not allow the new Member States' state budgets to become unbalanced. It is that problem that we have at the moment.
Let me just add, in conclusion, that the proposal currently under discussion has already taken on board many of the candidate countries' arguments and aspirations and contains many new ideas, the most important of which, in my view, is the creation of what is termed a Schengen facility, by which we will be supporting the new members in securing our external borders. I believe that what makes this idea so good is the fact that it will persuade the citizens that money is being spent here for a purpose that is of benefit to us all.
As President Prodi has made reference to Romania, Bulgaria, Cyprus and Turkey, I do not need to repeat what he said, but I do want to put forward a few ideas for your consideration. In the situation as it is at the moment, in which we are closer than we have been in decades to resolving the Cyprus problem, and there is a real opportunity to sort the problem out – an opportunity that will pass us by if it is not done before Copenhagen – at a moment such as this, positive, encouraging signs are of extraordinary importance. It would therefore be right and proper for the European institutions, even before Copenhagen, to speak out clearly in favour of the international community taking its share of responsibility in managing the great tasks that will remain to be dealt with after the Cyprus issue is resolved. This country will have great burdens laid upon it, burdens that it cannot bear alone, and it will be dependent on help from the international community. The sooner the international community declares its readiness to provide this aid, the greater, perhaps, will be the willingness to do as the United Nations proposes.
All things considered, I believe that we can be satisfied with the position that we have reached. What we now need is a final great effort, an effort made in full awareness of the fact that time is running out. We have often spoken of a window of opportunity. I had no inkling of just how true that is. We must all be aware that if we do not act now, every month in which we hesitate will make things more and more difficult. I am firmly convinced that it would take only six months for the Budget situation in the Member States to make a solution almost impossible. So I can only say that it must be done now, and all parties must, in heart and mind, surmount the obstacles!"@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples