Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-11-18-Speech-2-043"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20031118.2.2-043"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, I should like to concur with the words spoken, to my great delight, by Mr Nassauer, namely that the implementation of the 2004 work programme is starting under a very dark cloud, particularly on account of the fact that the two key countries, France and Germany, which, in the framework of the EMU, invented the Stability Pact, have, five years down the line, pretty much forgotten the promises they made. And that the architects of this pact have shifted from being strong to being weak, from being stable to being unstable, from being reliable to being unreliable, and from having a sense of responsibility to having no sense of responsibility. These are the terrible facts that were also recently reaffirmed on Dutch television by the director of the Dutch Bank, when he also remarked that without a Stability Pact, there would not have been a euro and that we are even being taken for a ride by those who have drafted this Stability Pact.
It is under this cloud that further discussions on the EU's enlargement are taking place. There are a few more countries waiting to join. In my view, it is very important for us to doggedly persevere with honest and coherent policy, and also to remain strict with those countries in respect of the criteria, particularly where the issues of the rule of law, democracy and good neighbourliness are concerned. It is unwise to treat the Balkan countries as if the race were already over. Those countries will first need to prove that they belong in the European Union. In addition, the introduction of criteria other than those previously agreed should be rejected, such as differences in religion, the size of the country or of the population, any strategic location, political benefits, the date of membership application, historical relations or economic benefit. These are all elements which, naturally, occur to everyone sooner or later, but it would be extremely bad if these were to exclude or relativise the agreed criteria.
Mr Verheugen mentioned the need for more common foreign and security policy in the light of enlargement. What is the Council's position on that? Does it share Commissioner Verheugen's view that we, because of enlargement, should strive towards a common foreign and security policy with all the more urgency?"@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples