Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2004-03-10-Speech-3-050"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20040310.2.3-050"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, honourable Members, this is probably the last big debate of this Parliament on what is a really great and historic project, and for my part I would like to take the opportunity to thank your House most sincerely for its cooperation on this project, in particular the Committee on Foreign Affairs, Human Rights, Common Security and Defence Policy, its chairman Mr Brok and the rapporteurs.
The Commission will use the instruments it has available to solve outstanding problems realistically and responsibly. We are making preparations. I cannot yet tell you whether safeguards will have to be applied or not. The time for such a decision has not yet come. As I said, if it should be necessary we will do it realistically and responsibly and keep you informed.
Let me now say a word about something that is particularly on the minds of all of us these days, namely Cyprus. If this question could still be solved before 1 May, then we would be fully justified in saying that enlargement not only prevents crises but that it also resolves crises and conflicts. That would be an incredibly important signal for the whole region.
We can say that it was the European Union that got the peace process moving again and enabled the UN Secretary-General to call renewed talks. I was in Cyprus for the start of the talks on 19 February and had good discussions with the UN and the leaders of the two communities. Since then, there have been intensive political and technical contacts. The Commission has said from the outset that it now considers the Cyprus talks a top priority and we have therefore done all in our power to support the peace process. Commission experts are assisting the United Nations team in Cyprus. I have done everything the UN has asked. Whenever extra help was asked for, we always gave it right away. The technical level talks in Cyprus are going very well as a result, and we have also at long last begun to organise content-wise preparations for possible accession with the Turkish community. Late, I have to say, but the responsibility for that rests with Mr Denktash.
We are now preparing the necessary legal instruments for the accession of a united Cyprus. We will need regulations for the gradual introduction of the
in the north of the island. The use of Turkish as a new official language will require preparations, and we will not be able to get everything done by 1 May. We will therefore have to provide transitional periods in a number of areas.
Let me say once again that we are in a position to transfer the results of the Cyprus talks into Community law provided those results do not run counter to the principles on which the European Union is founded, namely democracy, the rule of law and respect for human rights.
We are of course also setting conditions, and I will reiterate them: We need a new Cyprus that speaks with one voice. We need a new Cyprus that is capable of acting in international fora at all times and does not carry the risk of blocking them. We also need a new Cyprus whose central structures are strong enough to implement and enforce all its international obligations, including Community law. For us, these conditions are absolutely essential.
We are willing to convene an international donors’ conference to help pay the costs of unification, and I urgently call on the two communities, the Turkish Cypriots and the Greek Cypriots, to take advantage of this unique opportunity and to give a signal of willingness for peace and reconciliation in this part of the world.
I would now like to say something about Romania and Bulgaria. We will do all we can to assist the Presidency in continuing negotiations with the same tempo and the same quality and in bringing them to a conclusion within the proposed timetable. We have put the proposal for the common financial package for Bulgaria and Romania on the table. Discussions so far show that the Commission proposal has been well received over all. In the light of the financial package for the ten, the financial package for Bulgaria and Romania is fair, balanced and realistic. We shall present the concrete proposals for the negotiating positions in April.
So far as Bulgaria is concerned, I agree with the assessment made by the rapporteur, Mr Van Orden, and would like to say for my part, too, that remarkable progress has been made. The country still has further efforts to make, especially in strengthening administrative and judicial capacities. We are concentrating on these areas in our cooperation with Bulgaria.
We have seen what we can achieve – even with so great and difficult a task – when the institutions of the European Union have a clear common objective and when they are determined to work together to achieve it. I will not hide my great satisfaction at the fact that ten new Members will be acceding on 1 May and that we have completed this difficult process, but I cannot deny either that my satisfaction is mixed with a measure of concern.
Romania can also count on our assistance and solidarity. I have followed your debate very attentively and I admire the seriousness with which Parliament is working on the problems in Romania. I believe you have now struck a balance, which means that the report neither paints too rosy a picture nor calls into doubt the European Union’s political commitment to Romanian accession. That is good, because Romania needs encouragement, but it also needs a very clear answer to the question of what is still to be done. The Commission agrees with the rapporteur about the areas in which further efforts are required. These are administrative reform, reform of the legal system and preventing corruption, and I want to make it very clear that when it comes to fighting corruption the political system must be included. It is not enough to put petty officials on trial; their superiors must be in the dock as well. Romania also needs to be more convincing in its handling of European money and, before that, to prepare its negotiating positions better.
Baroness Nicholson raised the subject of adoption. I want to make the Commission’s position on this clear again. Our policy is geared clearly and unequivocally to the welfare of the child. That is the opposite of a policy that serves the interests of families in all possible countries that are looking for children to adopt. This difference is crucial. Anyone whose focus is not the welfare of the child but the interests of families that are seeking to adopt and the non-governmental organisations that represent their interests is creating a market, and anyone creating a market can expect problems in Romania. That is why the Commission insists that there must be a moratorium on international adoptions until legislation is in force that is fully up to international standards on child protection and until administrative structures are in place to ensure that such legislation is enforced.
The Commission, Parliament and the Member States still share the common objective of concluding negotiations in 2004, with accession in 2007. I am sure we will all do everything we can to help Romania and Bulgaria in this. The key to success, however, lies in Sofia and even more in Bucharest.
I cannot overlook the fact that a very broad debate on this enlargement is only now getting under way in the Member States – far too late, I think. For many years, I have repeatedly said in this House that this debate must be conducted in the Member States in order to inform people and take them along this road with us. Only now, when it is about to happen, has it made the European media headlines and become a number one issue for the European public. No one in this House will be surprised – I am not – that all the fears, the concerns and the feelings of uncertainty that we have known about for years and have tried to deal with by providing people with information are now surfacing again.
Let me be very clear about this: the political elites in the Member States ought to have done more to make public opinion in the Member States understand this great historic task. I am saying this now quite deliberately and also with some bitterness because we really have pointed out often enough how necessary it is. There is still time. The message we have to get across to people is quite clear. Yes, this enlargement will create problems. This enlargement will force us to make adjustments. A lot of things will change completely from what we were used to. There was no sensible alternative, however. We had to do it. We had to accept our historic responsibility of shaping the great change in Europe in such a way politically that it will lead to greater peace, security and prosperity for the people.
The message must be that this enlargement will not create problems but that it is the only way to solve the problems caused by the great changes that took place in Europe 14 or 15 years ago. Let me say this once again at the beginning of this debate because I really am convinced that the democratic quality of this process depends on Europe’s citizens understanding it and sharing the objective.
So far as the state of preparedness of the ten countries that will be acceding on 1 May is concerned, ladies and gentlemen, we have kept you informed of the results of our monitoring. I informed the Heads of Government of the ten countries of the results of that monitoring last November and since then we have been working closely with those countries to solve these problems. There have now been further consultations with all ten countries in which we took stock. We found that progress has been made in all areas, in some cases remarkable progress. We are now receiving further information on further progress every day, and I therefore find a very positive trend over all as regards completion of the outstanding tasks.
I do not want to hide the fact, however, that there are still problems in a few areas. That is true in particular for the creation of the necessary conditions for the payment of agricultural subsidies. Our system is obviously very complicated. Perhaps we could give some thought to whether the problem really is that the ten new Member States are not intelligent enough or not energetic enough to solve the problem, or whether it is perhaps rather that the system has now become so complicated that a country that has not grown up with it is unable to satisfy our requirements. I have come to have great doubts as to where the problem really lies, whether it is only with the future Member States or whether it is not also for a large part on our side.
Another problematic issue remaining in most countries is food safety, the modernisation of food-processing establishments and their supervision for the protection of public health. My fellow-Commissioner Mr Byrne is in constant close contact with the relevant ministers. Here again I want to make it absolutely clear that the Commission guarantees there will be no compromises on food safety. Only products that meet our standards will come on to the internal market."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples