Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-10-25-Speech-3-025"

PredicateValue (sorted: default)
rdf:type
dcterms:Date
dcterms:Is Part Of
dcterms:Language
lpv:document identification number
"en.20061025.4.3-025"2
lpv:hasSubsequent
lpv:speaker
lpv:spoken text
"Mr President, Prime Minister Vanhanen has given you a comprehensive overview of the results of the informal European Council in Lahti last Friday. I should like to concentrate on a few points. Secondly, the European Council agreed to create a network of energy correspondents, which will also make us better prepared for unexpected shocks to our energy supply. Thirdly, the European Council agreed on a specific common approach to Russia. We made clear to President Putin our wish to have a close energy relationship with such a key partner, but that relationship must be based on the principles that Russia has already signed up to at the G8 hosted by Russia this year, as well as the energy charter: transparency, the rule of law, reciprocity and non-discrimination, along with market opening and market access. Those principles apply to energy, but not just energy. They are necessary elements in increasing the mutual confidence and investment essential to a long-term relationship. That message was all the more powerful in that we were united. In Lahti there was a clear sense of solidarity, an understanding that the European Union will act as one and that Europeans should receive the same standards of reliability from our Russian partners, whichever Member State is concerned. Prime Minister Vanhanen spoke on behalf of the whole European Council, presenting the general issues regarding our broad relations with Russia, and I was proud to have been asked to speak on energy matters. It was important for that meeting and for the success of the Lahti summit that the statements by the Presidency and by the European Commission were clearly supported by all members of the European Council. The idea of solidarity is more important than ever. Solidarity and coherence are more than ever the key words of our European Union. Going forward on energy, within the framework of our new global agreement with Russia, will help ensure that this common approach is maintained. In short, the message is getting through: energy is a European issue and needs European solutions. There is growing recognition in the Council of what you in Parliament have long known, i.e. that the European Union has a central role to play in creating energy security and, through energy policy, in tackling climate change. That bodes well for the energy package that the Commission will present in January. The European Union must not reduce its relationship with Russia to energy. At the dinner with President Putin, the European Union raised other issues: human rights, trade, visas, culture and common international concerns. We covered sensitive issues like Georgia. Prime Minister Vanhanen repeated the European Union’s concern at the murder of Anna Politkovskaya, expressed so eloquently in our previous debate in the European Parliament. As we negotiate a new global agreement with Russia, this broad spread of issues must be maintained. That is the essence of a comprehensive agreement. Thirdly, at Lahti there was a short but important discussion on immigration. Again, there was a clear understanding that this was a collective problem, demanding a collective response. I was able to explain that in the coming weeks the Commission will be making proposals on how to improve maritime control of the Union’s southern borders. We will also be updating the global approach on migration in the run-up to the December European Council and working to tackle the problem at source in the Euro-African Conference on Migration and Development next month. However, there is still much more that we could do in this area if the political will and determination is there to give us the tools and resources needed. In particular, we believe that our decision-making system should be adapted. We can already do that under the existing Treaties. We cannot go on waiting so long for decisions that are so often blocked because of the rule of unanimity. Let us be frank: it is completely absurd that in a common space of freedom of movement we still sometimes think in terms of 25 migration policies. We need a European policy on migration. Finally, Darfur was also discussed. I remain determined that we will do all we can to prevent another humanitarian tragedy. The Lahti summit should be seen as part of a process. As you know, we have been saying that we should drive forward integration through practical, concrete actions and we have been doing so, hand in hand with Parliament and the Council. We have set out an ambitious agenda, for example on security, on energy, on research, and now we must put that agenda into action. That is precisely what we did at Lahti. Therefore, Lahti was another signpost on our collective road towards equipping Europeans for globalisation. We will not be diverted from this path. The expectations of our citizens for a Europe of practical results are increasing. We must continue to respond. I am grateful to Mr Vanhanen for his excellent chairmanship and to the Finnish Presidency for our close cooperation. May it continue to the end of the Presidency and beyond. That is the way to achieve practical results for our Europe. Firstly, on innovation, everyone agrees that innovation is important and that Europe is lagging behind. There is a consensus on the need for more support and incentives for innovation and fewer barriers for innovators. That has been endorsed in the European Council and in resolutions from this Parliament. What we needed were some clear, practical steps to show that Europe was prepared to take a lead and that is what we got at Lahti. On joint technology initiatives, for example, key projects such as the Artemis Programme on embedded computers were being held back by a lack of national funds. Now we have some clear commitments for direct support. On procedures to set European standards for products, we have an agreement that these should be speeded up. I also believe that momentum is building up on intellectual property, including patents, and the Commission will push that further before the end of the year. Importantly, the Commission received the green light on the European Institute for Technology (EIT). I am grateful for the support I received from all the Members who spoke in favour of the EIT in the part-session two weeks ago. There is a growing consensus that the EIT will offer European leadership on innovation. We are receiving enthusiastic support from all over the business and scientific community in Europe. The attention given by Parliament to that important initiative has been of real help in developing the details of the proposal. Of course there will now be negotiations on details, including the budget. I look forward to working with you and the Council in order to move swiftly towards adoption of the regulation. I believe that the EIT can be a flagship of excellence in innovation for Europe. We should ask the EIT to make its first priority the great challenges of climate change and everything related to environmentally-friendly sources of energy. That is an important task for us as a society. We should ask the scientific community of Europe to help us solve these problems, so that we can maintain the lead in what is perhaps the most important challenge of the 21st century. The second main issue in the debate was energy. The Commission, working closely with the Presidency, had identified three practical steps forward, and we received support for them all. First, the European Council agreed that we should step up our energy relations with our neighbours, especially producers like Russia, Norway or Algeria, and key transit countries like Turkey and Ukraine."@en1
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata

Named graphs describing this resource:

1http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/English.ttl.gz
2http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/Events_and_structure.ttl.gz

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph