Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-03-11-Speech-2-046"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20030311.3.2-046"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, I should like briefly to respond to some of the questions, which are extremely interesting. It is a pity that the majority of the Members are absent. This should be a dialogue. However, I am glad to see that Mr Elles is here, and so I will address my answers primarily to him, for he has asked a number of key questions.
I agree with what Mr Swoboda said regarding the issue of the visa policy – which he described as stupid – not because we do not need to be rigorous in protecting the Union’s borders but because I genuinely feel that it is a policy which is in need of a complete overhaul. Indeed, in many cases, criminals have no trouble at all obtaining visas whereas, for normal citizens, this is often a tedious process
which is not matched by greater controls, and I am saying this precisely because I have seen how the visa policy is applied in practice. What we need is not, I would stress, to reduce the protection of our borders but, on the contrary, to increase it and make it more effective and focused.
Finally, Mr Caudron’s last point: the Commission displays unwarranted optimism in its report. We are in an extremely difficult situation in which everything is falling apart. I want to make it quite clear that we are fully aware of the difficulty of the situation, of the tragic events taking place, but we are also aware of the huge importance of maintaining a balanced approach which takes all the factors into account, of the need to give maximum consideration to the work of the United Nations, of the fact that the new strategy genuinely calls for stronger, universally supported international institutions, with regard to which Europe’s role is indispensable.
I believe that there may well be an extremely serious crisis in the coming weeks, but I am deeply convinced that this very crisis will reveal the indispensable role of the European institutions. Europe alone has succeeded in uniting with peace as its top priority, introducing and implementing a new concept of national interest and relating it to the common interest, behaving towards the countries which support it with openness and displaying, I would say, a new insight into world relations and issues. This cannot go unnoticed. Clearly, at a time of crisis such as this, people are not paying as much heed to us as we might like, but we know that we are sowing seeds for the future.
First of all, he raised the issue of whether this perspective is just for five years or whether it is for seven years. We are not in a position to decide, and so we have kept our options open. I personally am in favour of a five-year perspective, both because that would synchronise it with Parliament’s work and because I feel that a seven-year perspective would be too long, that it would make control too difficult and extend beyond our powers of farsightedness.
Mr Elles also raised the issue of the number of Commissioners. The problem is not the number of Commissioners but the authority to organise and take decisions accorded to the President. Whatever the number of Commissioners, the question is how to organise the Commission’s work. It can be managed well with a small number of Commissioners or it can be managed well with a large number of Commissioners. Then, as regards the staff and the translation service, we have made veritable Herculean efforts and restricted the number of new staff to be employed to cope with enlargement to the bare minimum.
Mr Elles raised a number of other points which I feel it is important to discuss. For instance, he pointed out possible shortcomings in the chapter on external relations, particularly as regards the transatlantic partnership. I mentioned one of the two errors to be avoided right at the beginning of my speech, that of failing to understand the importance of the transatlantic partnership, and I did so precisely because I consider it to be crucial. Indeed, the ‘peace group’ set up by Commissioner Lamy is concerned with this too. More specifically, there are two major dimensions of external relations – the regional dimension – ‘Wider Europe’, the project we are approving today – and the international dimension, which essentially and primarily covers transatlantic relations.
Reforming the Commission has been a priority right from the beginning and, starting in 2004, we will have completely new Staff Regulations. It has been a huge undertaking. We have a qualification process which covers all the institutions, today we are discussing the annual policy strategy, we have completely transformed the Commission’s financial management and we have a new management system giving much greater powers and responsibilities – this is vitally important for our future – to our officials, we also have a new control system and we are working on precisely the new accounting system, as you are aware, Mr Elles. Seeing as you mentioned the letter, now that I know of its existence I can assure you it will be published immediately, for these things must be made public. In any case, however, we must realise that, should a disciplinary procedure be necessary, all the rights of those involved in the procedure must be respected. In any case – I would stress – the letter must be made public without delay.
As far as the famous requests still outstanding are concerned, I will look into it. I will do everything possible and more, employing all available resources to look into it as quickly as possible. I must say, however, that the fact that 400 requests – as you said , Mr Elles – have yet to be addressed, might mean that too many requests have been made. I take the blame for the delay in producing some replies, but I believe we have a barrage of extremely important questions to deal with.
I would also like to focus on the point raised by Mr Clegg concerning better regulation, for it is related to these issues. An agreement is imminent, but I must say that my impression is that Parliament is taking less interest in the matter today than it did some time ago. I would like to take this opportunity to call for a last spurt so that an agreement can be achieved
during the interinstitutional summit on 19 March. I formally urge the Presidency of Parliament to make the most of this opportunity and to be prepared for a political conclusion next week. The Commission, for its part, is genuinely ready for this.
General Morillon asked for information on the budget heading and research related to defence. We are exploring the possibility of financing military research outside the Sixth Framework Programme for research but we do not yet have a definitive answer on this matter. I have pointed out the need for a debate – it would be useful to discuss the issue and we will submit solutions as soon as possible.
My final points are in response to the questions raised by Mr Swoboda, in other words what he described as the imprecise debate on objectives, on the Balkans and the Mediterranean. The Commission has presented – and it is supplementing that material today – an extremely precise plan with a clear policy which treats the Balkans as part of Europe. They will be Members of the Union, but they will be subject to the same strict conditions which have applied to the countries of this first phase of enlargement. There are no discounts. The door will be open when they approach it, but they will only be allowed to come in when they are ready. There is absolutely no leeway on this."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples