Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-05-16-Speech-2-200"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20060516.35.2-200"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, the two Dutch Protestant parties for which I can speak in this House have been consistently in favour of healing Europe’s post-war division. At the same time, we have always advocated a solid enlargement of the European Union, and hence an emphatic enforcement of the recognised accession criteria, the well-known Copenhagen criteria. We were saddened by the fact that Romania and Bulgaria were unable to join in 2004 during the Union’s biggest enlargement round in history.
After all, following the revolution of Europe’s magic year of 1989, church and civil-society contacts were strengthened between our grassroots support and both candidate countries. We could, at the same time, completely relate to the delay of 2004. How do we feel about the two present accession dates of 1 January 2007 and 1 January 2008, respectively? As I already said, my party is in favour of the ‘solid’ accession of Sofia and Bucharest, that is to say on the basis of a separate assessment for Bulgaria and Romania. The word ‘solid’ refers to facts and actual steps of reform rather than intentions.
Finally, it was not for nothing that the Council and Commission added two specific safeguard clauses to the three regular clauses in the accession treaties with Bulgaria and Romania. This also mirrors our message to the Commission. We would like a clear signal in October about Bulgaria’s and Romania’s readiness to accede on 1 January 2007, for such clarity will be to the benefit of all parties in Europe."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples