Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2004-10-13-Speech-3-023"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20041013.3.3-023"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, Mr President of the Commission, ladies and gentlemen, this is an important debate, one that merits the presence of the Presidency of the Council, and one that also deserves to be attended by the entire Commission. What I would like to see in future is the Commission as a whole being present in the plenary not only when it seeks our vote of confidence, but also when assessing results on which our future, too, depends. So I would have liked today, to see both the Commission, and also the Council, fully represented.
This Commission, under Romano Prodi’s presidency, had – as is usual in human and political life – its light as well as its shadows. In communication terms, we have a dual role; on the one hand, we are the Commission’s allies, in that we defend the Community model, but we are also there to keep tabs on it, and we are determined to carry on doing so in future. I agree with the outgoing President of the Commission when he says that the Interinstitutional Agreement has strengthened democracy and the parliamentary approach, and we see the new Commission, too, as being bound by what we have agreed with the Commission under Mr Prodi.
In one historic area – that of enlargement – we achieved great things together. Our group was always a driving force behind membership for the countries of Central Europe, as well as Malta and Cyprus, and the fact that, as a result of the last elections to the European Parliament in June, Members from the ten new countries are able to take part in this debate in our House is something in which we can all take pride.
The outgoing President of the Commission used the term ‘intelligent’ with reference to something he once described as stupid, that being the Maastricht criteria. This utterance, this comment, by Romano Prodi is something that we still do not regard as his finest hour. We do, though, very much appreciate the work of the departing Commissioner who had responsibility for monetary matters – I do not want to name names, for if I did, I would be forced to do so in many other instances – and the way in which the former Commissioner defended the stability of Europe’s currency. I hope that the new member of the Commission with responsibility for this, and indeed the new Commission as a whole, will defend the Stability Pact and Europe’s monetary stability.
We were not exactly satisfied with the proposals on chemicals policy, with which we will have to deal over the coming months and quite possibly for years to come. Without wanting to go into detail, I would say that it is important that we enable this Europe of ours to compete rather than pursuing a policy that will end up with a de-industrialised Europe and the loss of jobs. We need a sensible balance between ecology and economics, and the best social policy is about creating jobs and keeping the ones we have. So it was perhaps a failing on the part both of this House and also, and in particular, of the Commission, that the targets we set as part of the Lisbon strategy were insufficiently ambitious and too diffuse. When completing the internal market, we had definite goals and fixed dates, and what we should all learn from that for the future is that we, if we want to make Europe more competitive, have to set strategic goals, and also firm dates, so that Europe is better able to compete.
Farewells, of course, always involve some regrets, and so let me say to you, Mr Prodi, as President of the Commission, that you know what high regard I have for you as a person, and it would be less than honest of me if I were not to mention today how I found it regrettable that you have, in recent months – one might say, in the last eighteen months or the last two years – given priority to domestic politics in Italy. I would have preferred you to have focussed all your efforts on European politics and on your work as President of the Commission. All in all, though, I would like us to take our leave of each other on a positive note. I would like to thank you all, and if I were to single out one of you, it would be Mrs Loyola de Palacio, who, as Vice-President of the Commission, was responsible for relations with the European Parliament. I would, however, like to thank all the members of the Commission for their commitment and wish them all the best. In saying that, I am not directly referring to the personal political commitments of all of them, but, personally, I wish you all the best, and I shall take it as read that the Commission as a whole wanted to do its best for this Europe of ours as a community, and that is what we, Commission and Parliament together, must continue to do, so warm thanks and best wishes to you all."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples