Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2004-04-21-Speech-3-335"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20040421.14.3-335"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, I would have been quite happy to applaud Mr Rocard had it not been for the unfortunate fact that not everything he said was in line with what I am going to say. That is why I could not give him the applause I would have liked to give. The fact is that I cannot act without thinking; I have to be guided by the facts.
The Capital of Culture that we are discussing today is something like a beacon of light in the small amount of cultural policy that we are allowed to deal with, so I am happy that we are carrying the torch onwards. The idea has been around for a long time now; it originated with a Greek lady Member of this House, and I think we can take pride in it. I also agree with Mr Rocard’s demand that the choice should be of at least two cities. It was after all we who introduced this idea, and I think, Commissioner, that it can be put into practice right now.
In this Capital of Culture, European diversity ought to be much more visible than it has been up to now, and so I do not think that these amendments run counter to what the Commissioner wants to do. I therefore ask her to consider whether she cannot perhaps incorporate this.
Secondly, I have to reiterate how much we all regret the Council of Ministers’ decision, none more than I, as I, back in 1999, was furiously angry about the Council of Ministers’ decision, seeing it as short-sighted and guided by national considerations. At the time, the Council of Ministers knew as well as we did that the European Union was going to be enlarged, and it showed that it did not give a damn about it, by naming only Western European cities right up to 2019. That is to the Council’s shame and not to our own, for we were bound by their decision.
The decision has been made, though, and, as they say where I come from
! That is why we cannot change the fact that, up to 2019, the countries in question will also be entitled to propose cities. That is why, for the benefit of my German audience, I would like to say that Germany will be able to propose a city for 2010. We in the Group of the European People’s Party (Christian Democrats) and European Democrats, though, endorse the Commissioner’s proposal for two Capitals of Culture, simply because the 10 new Member States cannot do anything about the shameless conduct of the old 15. It is now for the Commissioner to remedy that; she can do so by giving two cities the opportunity to present themselves to the world, and I do not believe it is so terrible that we should be doing this, if, for example, in 2010, we have one city from Germany and another from Hungary. I do not see that as such a bad idea. The two countries have marvellous things in common and the rivalries between them have been productive.
Let me say one thing more: we may be 25 countries strong today, but there will be even more by 2019 – Romania, Bulgaria and Croatia, not to mention the others. If we are allowed to name only one Capital of Culture, that means that each country would have a turn only once in a generation, and we cannot expect the public to put up with that. It is for that reason that I, like my group, support the Commissioner’s proposal."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples