Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-03-22-Speech-3-065"
Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
---|---|
rdf:type | |
dcterms:Date | |
dcterms:Is Part Of | |
dcterms:Language | |
lpv:document identification number |
"en.20060322.11.3-065"2
|
lpv:hasSubsequent | |
lpv:speaker | |
lpv:spokenAs | |
lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, we are now discussing another strategy, another paper and another set of priorities; in the same way in which we debated the others, we would like to place the emphasis on two or three issues – firstly on the agreement concerning the financial perspectives.
Mr President, you know very well that coming to an agreement now, today, with the Council would mean a dramatic reduction in our ambitions and, naturally, those of citizens. We therefore call on you to make an agreement and to work for an agreement, but subject to our conditions, which ought also to be yours. I fully agree with the agreement on the financial perspectives, but not subject to the Council’s conditions. Until we can count on agreement and a clear alliance with the Commission on this point, debates like today’s will remain somewhat devoid of substance.
Secondly, you mentioned other topics and I would like to refer to two in particular: one is the issue of immigration and internal security. You said that the priorities will be Schengen, controls and borders, but you said nothing about one point although it is mentioned in the text: the problem is an aspect that we consider a priority, which is legal immigration procedures. This element is present in your texts, but it is absent from what is done and what is said! The fact that the Commission is not able to say one word – not even one – on the subject of the thousands who have died between Mauritania and the Canary Isles and on the fact that my country, Italy, still has an unknown agreement with Libya that has been hidden from you and from this Parliament, which has caused the death of a huge number of people in that desert, means that debate about a common immigration policy is still just empty words. We would be delighted to hear just one word from you on this subject that is not merely a general remark.
Thirdly, there is the issue of energy. We have a problem; you are aware that there are differences of opinion on this matter, and particularly that in our view nuclear energy and renewable energy cannot be placed on the same footing – they are two different things. We acknowledge the fact that there is nuclear energy on this continent, but we cannot believe that this is an energy of the future for our continent, partly because – and this is not a minor consideration – we still have to import uranium, whereas we do not have to import sun or wind! This is an important point, at least from a conceptual point of view, and nuclear power should not be placed on the same footing! We have to understand, very clearly and very specifically, that we cannot depend on nuclear power. Nuclear power today meets only a part of our requirements and it is certainly not an option for the future.
In addition, on energy issues, there is still a gaping hole in the Commission’s strategy: its silence on the transport question. Seventy per cent of our dependence on oil relates to transport. Even in this Parliament we have not been able to help very much, I agree, with regard to an innovative transport policy, but I believe that the Commission ought to help us on this matter.
I would like to end, Mr President, by saying that there is another priority which is being ignored in this area, and that is our cities. Cities are an opportunity not only as a kind of laboratory but also for Europe’s use, and currently insufficient use is being made of them both from the viewpoint of financial support and from the viewpoint of major strategies. Perhaps it is better to start with cities rather than with major infrastructure, which in any case will not be financed by Europe either."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples