Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-06-04-Speech-3-168"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20030604.4.3-168"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, Mr Nordmann expressed himself in the most eloquent terms. Following the example of Mr Cashman just now, I would also like to declare my support for Mr Nordmann and, taking up his arguments, join him in expressing the conviction that there are many unspoken prejudices in this report. Such prejudices should not figure in an objective account of the state of a nation. Naturally, the political beliefs of all interested parties should be respected. I subscribe, however, to what the honourable Member said about secularism and about a consideration of the very essence of the Kemalist state. Such a consideration was entirely absent from the report, as was, by all appearances, any mention of the efforts of the current Prime Minister of Turkey to bind his country securely to Europe.
In this context, Mr Oostlander, if this Parliament had been given the possibility of producing a report as detailed as this one not only on the countries applying for accession, but also on the current Member States of the Union (I am thinking here of my own country), the fact is that it would have taken not 56 paragraphs, but perhaps twice that, to deal with conditions in Italian prisons, the state of the Italian legal system, and many other areas besides, in which things are going badly. In our countries too, ladies and gentlemen, or in some of our countries at least, there was a time not so long ago when people went to prison because they were Jehovah’s Witnesses and did not want to do their military service. They were compelled to do it by force, or thrown into prison. Our countries have experienced all of that.
Turkey must, of course, make significant progress. We cannot have it both ways, however: either we offer Turkey a landfall on the coast of Europe, or else we refuse it. If we opt for the latter, we not only make a catastrophic political and strategic error: we also point Turkey, push it, in a way, towards other coasts, other shores, which would be much more dangerous not only for stability but also, I believe, for the welfare of the Turks and their progress towards democracy, the rule of law and human rights.
To this end, my radical colleagues in this Parliament and myself, together with Members of the Group of the Greens/European Free Alliance, whom I would like to take this opportunity to thank, have tabled an amendment designed precisely to avoid closing the door on Turkey, as the Oostlander report does. The first draft of this report, whose tone brought to my mind the Battle of Lepanto more than anything else, has, of course, been improved in the meantime. We have therefore tabled an amendment in which we declare ourselves convinced that the conditions for Turkey to be admitted to the accession negotiations will be fulfilled as long as the Turkish Government pursues its current programme of essential reform with steadfastness and determination.
The rapporteur has suggested that the amendment be included as an addition, showing a desire to compromise which I applaud. It is in a similar spirit of compromise that I accept the rapporteur’s offer, following the example of the Verts/ALE Group. In doing so, I hope that we can also come to an agreement on a message to Turkey whose dominant theme is not that the door is closed, but that we are waiting for real progress. Obviously, when the moment comes, everyone will be able to take their own decisions. Let us at least leave that door open, however. With this in mind, I hope that the House will approve this amendment unanimously."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples