Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-06-14-Speech-3-011"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20060614.2.3-011"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, I was pleased that the President-in-Office of the Council spoke of a working Summit. After all, Europe will make progress only as a result of day-to-day efforts, of hard, specific work, and not as a result of brilliant feats of rhetoric – there is no shortage of soapbox speeches in Europe. I should like to wish the President-in-Office every success for the Summit.
My particular thanks go out to the President of the Commission, however: not only for being here today – he could, of course, say that he is only present when the President of the European Council is here – but for what he has said today. After all, we recently heard great criticism of the Commission President by our esteemed fellow Member Mr Schulz and, as Mr Schulz is, of course, known for his objectivity, I am assuming he will be very complimentary about the Commission President’s speech in his own speech shortly.
This dual path – defence of the principles of the substance of the European Constitution on the one hand and specific projects for taking Europe forward on the other – has our strong support. I wish to stress on behalf of our group that this has our emphatic support, and it would be good if the other group chairmen were to join me in stating that quite clearly. When we celebrate the anniversary of 25 March 1957 next year – on 25 March 2007 – our group will insist that this event not be a celebration of those Heads of State or Government who engage in mutual appreciation under or in front of pretty flags, but rather that it express Europe’s democracy, and that there be European Parliament involvement in the declaration and the establishment of our objectives for the 21st century. I am saying this for the benefit of the General Secretariat of the Council, as it does not actually tend to be the Heads of State or Government who obstruct things. I would call on the General Secretariat of the Council to give Parliament due involvement from the outset, as the Commission President has proposed – for which we should like to express our appreciation and thanks to him.
My second comment concerns security in Europe. This, of course, is a delicate balancing act – on the one hand, there is the public’s need for protection against serious crime, against terrorism, against illegal immigration, and we expect specific measures to be taken on this, but, on the other hand, when it comes to immigration, we also expect respect for human dignity and a search for humane measures to deal with illegal immigration. We cannot accept the situation in which thousands of people are dying a wretched death in the Mediterranean and on the seas of this world, but instead must take specific measures on this, too – to prevent these human tragedies.
A further point concerns the Lisbon Strategy. On the issue of the Services Directive, we have proved our good will, our capacity for action – and compliments to the Austrian Presidency for taking this path. We are in favour of a European Institute of Technology – provided that it creates a network rather than new bureaucracy. As regards energy supply, we are in favour of diversity: diversity with regard to energy sources – we cannot rely on just one form of energy, nor can any form of energy be ruled out – and also diversity with regard to supply. We cannot rely on a single country or a small number of countries for our energy supply, but need diversity of suppliers too, and the principle of solidarity among all Member States of the EU applies here – we cannot leave anyone in the lurch.
Speaking of the concept of solidarity – and looking here at Mr Kasoulides – I consider it unacceptable for us to negotiate with Turkey at the present time – and that is a decision, and taking a decision means the Treaties must be complied with – when Turkey does not recognise one of the Member States of the EU, when it does not extend the customs union under the Ankara Protocol to Cyprus. This runs contrary to the solidarity that unites us in the EU, and for this reason we must insist that the customs union be put into effect.
My last comment concerns the debate on the Fundamental Rights Agency. I have my doubts as to whether this is the correct path to take, and I ask that we reconsider. Of course, the Council of Europe has been presented with a report by Jean-Claude Juncker on this subject. Parliament needs to consider the best means of cooperation with the Council of Europe and also with its Parliamentary Assembly. The work that the Council of Europe does today, which has proved its worth, should not simply be transferred to the institutions of the EU; instead, we should concentrate on ways of complementing each other, since the Council of Europe is also a European community of states, with 46 members. We have 25, soon to be more, and the activities of each community must complement the other’s sensibly. If the Council Presidency takes that into account at the Summit, my praise for the success of this Presidency will be even greater. I therefore wish the Presidency every success for the Brussels Summit tomorrow and the day after."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples