Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-03-26-Speech-3-024"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20030326.5.3-024"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
The European Council concluded that the slowdown in the economy had lasted longer than anticipated and that the current prospects of a recovery were overshadowed by the war, global political risks and economic uncertainties. The European Council also concluded that considerable progress had been made with the Lisbon agenda, now entering its fourth year. For example, five million new jobs have been created since the start of the Lisbon strategy – 500 000 of them in 2002 despite the less favourable economic climate, with unemployment declining by 2 million. Nonetheless, there is still a lot to do in order to achieve the Lisbon objectives. A great deal of effort is needed if we are to push ahead with our economic and social reforms.
Ladies and gentlemen, this – very briefly – was the outcome of discussions on the Lisbon strategy. Now I should like to say something on the subject of Iraq. It is a known fact that all the Member States of the European Union demanded the disarmament of Iraq and the destruction of any weapons of mass destruction it may have had. It is also a known fact that there is acute disagreement as to how and when disarmament will take place. This issue was discussed repeatedly in the Security Council without any agreement being reached. On the contrary, the divisions widened. It would therefore have been pointless for the Presidency to hope that the differences which have emerged over all the past few months would be overcome at the Council. On the contrary, it felt that, with the beginning of the military conflict, principles needed to be laid down for dealing with the situation caused by the start of war and that we should be thinking about the future and the aftermath of the crisis in order to preclude new divisions, in order to set clear, common objectives, in order to limit the repercussions of the war and avoid a chain reaction of crises and in order to be able to work once the war ends. That is our objective. Peace and progress in the region. At the beginning, this effort was met with doubt. Could we discuss this sort of agenda? However, the Council achieved a common position, pointing out, among other things, the need to safeguard the territorial integrity of Iraq, the need to address the major humanitarian needs in the aftermath of the conflict, the need for our solidarity with the countries affected by it and the central role of the United Nations, both in dealing with the Iraqi crisis and in the international system in general. The Security Council, the conclusions state, will need to give the United Nations a mandate to deal with the post-war period.
Another point was the need to reinvigorate the Middle East Peace Process, our determination to strengthen the common foreign and defence policy and the importance of the transatlantic partnership. Is the fact that we steered clear of the main problem a sign of hypocrisy, as some have suggested? No, it is not. The differences of opinion on the main problem were clear. The impasse was also clear. There was no point in discussing it. We needed to focus our attention elsewhere: to what is important for the future. And that is what we did.
Perhaps some people would have preferred to widen the gap, to add more fuel to the fire? We believe that, now that the war has raised even more questions, the European Union has a duty to send out a message about restoring peace in the region and dealing with the aftermath of the war. The future is every bit as important as the present. If we fail to address it, we shall find ourselves on a very slippery slope. Is the Union of Europe split at the moment? Yes, it is. However, the answer is not to exacerbate the divide, the answer is to try and highlight where we can work together and pull in the same direction. The decision on Iraq was a decision based on the premise that the European Union has a voice and must have a voice in international affairs. It is therefore a symbol of the efforts being made to create a balanced Euro-Atlantic relationship in which Europe maintains its independence, takes special initiatives and has its own role. That we want an independent Europe is clear from another point in the conclusions referring to greater research capabilities in the defence sector and the creation of a European defence capabilities development and acquisition agency.
Ladies and gentlemen, what is our objective? To get international relations working in a more widely acceptable manner at international level as quickly as possible. This presupposes that the United Nations, through its institutions, will issue the main guidelines on what is to happen after the war in Iraq. Its reinstatement from a challenged to an unchallenged international legal system will be achieved if it is clear that the United Nations are against taking on a central role. The decision emphasises the central role of the United Nations.
With the differences of opinion over Iraq, numerous people concluded, sadly, that we have no common foreign policy. But that is not strictly true. There are common positions on numerous foreign policy issues. On other issues, and on aspects of certain more general issues, the Union's foreign policy is taking shape. Policies in other sectors are also taking shape. And there are also divisions in other sectors. From the common agricultural policy through to immigration policy. And yet no one ever said that the European Union was superfluous because it failed to agree on the directive on working conditions for temporary agency workers or on how to deal with economic migrants seeking asylum or, finally, on changes to the Stability Pact.
Ladies and gentlemen, the European Union is constantly taking shape. That is why its development is a challenge, a challenge to think, to apply our knowledge and experience and work for a prosperous, secure future. The war in Iraq, which we have to deal with, is part of that challenge, which is why we cannot merely welcome or condemn it. We also need to look at the future prospects of Europe and the world. Our ambition in today's world is to put an end to war, to the reign of terror, to threats to man and his environment, by creating rules of global intergovernmentalism. The United Nations have not yet managed to become a convincing, efficient institution, even though they are charged with addressing issues which are vital to the global community. And it will be some time before they do. National chauvinism is extremely powerful, which is why we have a political duty to continue to strengthen the role of the European Union, thereby helping at European and global level to consolidate the process of peace, cooperation and progress.
The Brussels Summit showed that, despite our differences, we still feel Europe is the best way of preventing one new superpower from monopolising our cosmos. Europe's ability to participate and influence a multipolar world must be kept alive with initiatives, cooperation and a belief in our common future.
The spring Council in Brussels may not have answered questions, but it issued guidelines which will allow us to put Europe's role into practice, if we cooperate, if we live in harmony together, if we fight together for a multipolar world.
The European Council set four priorities: to raise employment and social cohesion is the first priority. By reforming tax and benefit systems and increasing incentives for labour market participation and incentives to encourage the labour markets to be more adaptable to changing economic conditions and, of course, by paying attention to social cohesion.
The second priority is to promote innovation and entrepreneurship. This means increasing company expenditure on research, facilitating the creation of companies that focus on innovation, improving their access to finance, reducing administrative burdens and encouraging the spirit of enterprise among young people.
The third priority is to strengthen the single market and connect Europe. We need to open up the European energy, transport and financial services markets and improve the regulatory framework and consumer protection.
The final priority is environmental protection for growth and jobs. This means taking action in the environmental field and promoting new investments in clean and more resource-efficient technologies.
At this point, ladies and gentlemen, I should like to say that, as the conclusions show, considerable progress has been made with the Lisbon strategy during the Greek Presidency. For example, significant results have been obtained as regards agreeing on better coordination of budgetary policies, agreeing on a transparent and cheap Community patent, fourteen years in the making, putting into place an integrated Europe-wide financial market, setting the direction for the revised European Employment Strategy, introducing a Tripartite Social Summit, establishing a Tripartite Social Summit, agreeing on energy taxation and setting targets in sectors such as renewable energy, increased energy efficiency and bio-fuels.
The European Council issued guidelines. The conclusions contain guidelines on how to achieve the objectives I have mentioned. In 2003, the European Union will have streamlined key policy coordination instruments. What are they? The Broad Economic Policy Guidelines, the Employment Guidelines and the Internal Market Strategy. The Council ordered these tools to be streamlined and coordinated and to be given a three-year perspective, in order to make them more efficient.
The Council took a series of decisions in specific sectors, such as employment and modernising the European social model. The Council urged the Member States to maintain the momentum of reform of national labour markets. As I said, it stressed the need to reform tax systems in order to promote employment and increase labour demand in Europe, improve the wage and salary formation system, so that they take into account the relationship between wages, price stability, productivity, training levels and labour market conditions, modernise employment legislation, taking account of the need for both greater flexibility and greater security and improve labour mobility over occupations, sectors, regions and across borders, for example by improving transparency and recognition between systems of vocational education.
Finally, in this sector, the European Council invited the Commission to establish a special European Employment Taskforce, headed by Mr Wim Kok, to propose specific measures to increase employment. The Council also touched on all the other sectors which constitute the Lisbon strategy: knowledge, innovation, entrepreneurship, competitiveness, and set certain deadlines for completing various reforms. Finally, I should like to mention that it laid down substantive regulations on safety at sea in the wake of the
accident."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples