Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-05-14-Speech-3-130"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2003-05-14"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:New Neighbours Initiative and The Wider Europe (continuation)2
dcterms:Language	"de"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20030514.7.3-130"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2003-05-14-Speech-3-1312
lpv:speaker	lp:Elisabeth Schroedter2
lpv:spokenAs	unknown; Bündnis 90/die Grünen (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 substitute; Committee on Regional Policy, Transport and Tourism (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3 member; G/EFA (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 vice-chair; Delegation to the EU-Ukraine and the EU-Moldova Parliamentary Cooperation Committees and Delegation for relations with Belarus (2002-02-07--2004-07-19)3 substitute; Delegation to the EU-Poland Joint Parliamentary Committee (2002-02-06--2004-04-30)3 member; Committee on Foreign Affairs, Human Rights, Common Security and Defence Policy (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, Mr President-in-Office of the Council, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, we fully support the desire of the Commission and the Council not to erect new walls within Europe. We do not want the hallmarks of the European Union to become borders protected by barbed wire and infrared cameras in the east and the south; we want the EU to be associated with partnership and closer bonds. The border regions in the east and the south were historically meeting places between people of different cultures, religions and lifestyles, and we should endeavour to recreate those regions. In political terms, the Commission communication may be right, but the measures proposed are not. Our greatest criticism is reserved for the way the Barcelona process, the EU partnership with Russia as a regional power and relations with neighbouring states who have indicated a desire for integration have all been thrown into the same pot. In this way, the real substance of the existing processes has been watered down, and existing concerns and objectives are recycled without a fresh assessment of achievements and developments to date. This is not the significant added value that we need for a new qualitative concept of ‘neighbour’. No solutions are offered for the real problems that will arise for people in eastern border regions in particular if Schengen is implemented, nor have suitable instruments been formulated with sufficient clarity. This represents an enormous shortcoming in the communication. We need the various problems to be dealt with individually, so that a solution can be found for the combination of regional communities, business life and family relations for which the new Schengen border will pose great difficulties in the east, by easing restrictions on a regional basis in border areas. In addition, an adequate budget must be provided to facilitate the preparations necessary. There should also be a financial instrument directly compatible with this and administered in a decentralised way. Last but not least, the eastern and southern border regions share a need for a humanitarian refugee policy that is both in line with the Geneva Convention and provides for burden sharing with our neighbours."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph