Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-11-17-Speech-4-167"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20051117.19.4-167"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, Mr Wijkman, ladies and gentlemen, I should like to begin by thanking you all. You have clearly played a vital part in the work that can be presented today. I hope that Parliament’s contributions will enable the final document to meet with everyone’s satisfaction, an outcome that would constitute an extremely important step forward.
Mr Kaczmarek has spoken to us about the role of the national parliaments and I am inclined to agree with him. If you recall, moreover, I travelled to a large number of national parliaments in order to defend the increase in public development aid in the various countries, and I would like to take advantage of being given the floor to confirm that I am always willing to go and answer questions or to participate in sittings within the national parliaments. I believe, in fact, that in a number of countries it is helpful for the national parliaments to be mobilised, informed and motivated with regard to the issue of development. I am therefore fully prepared to dedicate myself to this task.
Mr Martinez, you say that the current statement is disappointing. I readily admit that it is not perfect – that goes without saying – and I hope, moreover, that we will further improve it. That said, this statement does, despite everything, already constitute an important step forward, as this would be the first time that the European Union had access to a framework in this area. This would also be the first time that a policy was endorsed simultaneously by the Commission, by Parliament and by the Council, and that Parliament, like the Commission, would find itself providing, in my opinion, a more powerful lever for making development policy more effective and better coordinated. Therefore, I too of course would like this statement to be far more ambitious. Admittedly, it has been toned down at certain times but, believe me, we have not finished with our endeavours, and I am obviously relying both on Mr Wijkman and on certain Member States at Council level to help us to preserve the best and most progressive aspects of the statement.
As for Mrs Zimmer and the debt issue, we obviously agree on the fact that the debt burden must be reduced. On the other hand – but this would undoubtedly be another debate – I am not wildly in favour of simply cancelling the debt without any conditions and in all circumstances. However, I am resolutely and fervently in favour of reducing the debt or of cancelling it in very special cases and under very special conditions.
As regards Mr Libicki, I believe that this is a point on which we will not be able to agree. Your approach in terms of reproductive health differs from mine. You look on reproductive health as an ideological issue and I do not, because I, for my part, have a humanist outlook on the issue. I do not look on it as an ideological issue. Secondly – and I in no way intend to cause controversy here – I believe that you are confining the issue of reproductive health to abortion. I can see many other aspects to reproductive health; I can see above all the health and the rights of women and children. I am therefore not ideological.
I simply call on you to understand the reality in certain countries and in certain societies – I, in fact, encounter this reality on a very frequent basis – and I should truly like to be able to convince you that much still remains to be done on that score. Certain kinds of old-fashioned, conservative opinions – and I say this fully respecting the philosophical thoughts of others – do not seem to me to be overly generous in their responses to certain human tragedies with which I have come face to face. I therefore cannot accept this criticism. I am not prejudiced and I can respect everyone’s thoughts, philosophies, religious and other beliefs. I do believe, though, that at some point we should nonetheless go beyond those beliefs in order to see what really constitutes the general interest, in order to see what generosity really is and in order to learn how action should really be conceived for the best. This is what nevertheless seems to me to be a goal to achieve over and above any religious, ideological and philosophical divisions.
During recent months, Mr President, your Parliament has worked tirelessly to respond to the Commission’s offer and to contribute to obtaining a European development consensus representative of the will of the three European institutions: Parliament, the Commission and the Council. This joint effort is testament to the importance we all attach to development and shows that the institutions are working together to make our action more effective. We are right to do so. I have said many times over that development policy has the potential to be an important tool in making Europe a presence and a positive force in the world. Development policy could also play a crucial role in the Union’s foreign policy on account of its exemplary nature, not necessarily through its interventionism, but through the positive example it sets.
This is a role based on a long-term view rather than on short-term interests. This is a role that is focused on the well being of the people of developing countries, as well as on our own well-being. I believe that we are faced with a political decision: either we exploit this capacity in order to combat the negative effects of globalisation and in order to exploit the latter’s full potential fairly, or we stick rigidly to a charitable idea of development and wait for this idea to get completely out of hand, resulting in terrorism, massive and unmanageable migratory flows, pandemics, financial instability, poverty and destitution. Globalisation unites the North and the South and, in my opinion, development policy must act so that this union might be a source of justice and shared growth, and not one of dependency and poverty. The discussions with the Council are still taking place. The new development policy statement has not yet been finalised. What is more, I believe that, if everyone makes more of an effort, we are now really very close to a European development consensus. It simply remains for me to call on you to make one final effort together to follow up our joint work, in the spirit of the partnership that has united us over recent months with the aim of achieving our common objective.
As Commissioner, I should, at any rate, like firstly to thank you for your active contribution to the debates concerning my remit and my department, both for your pertinent questions and also, Mr Martinez, for your impertinent questions. I believe that it is crucial for the Commission permanently to be under pressure from Parliament because this is how progress is made. I believe that progress has never stemmed from consensus
. Progress always stems from tensions and from a clash of ideas, and I therefore thank you for having participated in this work. I believe that, without Parliament, I would have been very much worse off than I am today, and this without even mentioning the statement we have come up with today, which would have been far drearier than it is. I believe that we have here the grounds for drafting a fine text, which will represent a substantial step forward. In concluding this debate, Mr President, I wanted, for my part, to thank you once again for this contribution."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples