Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2007-11-13-Speech-2-012"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20071113.4.2-012"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, Commission President, Commissioners, ladies and gentlemen, may I also welcome you very warmly on behalf of my Group. Much of what the Commission President has said and which is included in this document meets with our approval. I would like to focus on two points which are crucial, in our view. These points are addressed at the end of your programme. I would have liked to see them included at the beginning, but their location in the text does not make them any less important.
Combating right-wing extremism is therefore not only about addressing the issue on an ideological level; it is of course about social issues as well. Unemployment, social exclusion and anti-social elements are still present in our society and are being exploited by the extreme right in their campaign against Europe. For that reason, Europe and the European Commission must take action here.
My colleague Mr Schulz, the Chairman of the Socialist Group in the European Parliament, has often said that we want a social Europe. That is our primary goal and it should be the primary goal of this programme as well. You have said that we can make '2008 a great year for Europe'. We think that 2008 should be a great year for social Europe. My plea to you, Commission President, is this: please, take the lead in achieving this social Europe!
The first point is communication. I can only endorse what Mr Nassauer has said. We must convey a clear message to citizens about what Europe is all about and what we are trying to achieve with our various legislative proposals; otherwise, we are wasting our time. I am very pleased with the approach to the issue of communication – which also lies in the hands of Madam Vice-President – and the proposals she has put forward, which envisage a joint approach with Parliament. However, it is also a question of the language we use when we communicate with citizens and how we convey the message about what we are trying to do.
Last year, we dealt with a number of items of legislation which improved the legal position of consumers, notably in telecommunications and other sectors. However, we have still not managed to convince our citizens satisfactorily that we are here for them and that we are not an elite group of people working away somewhere in Brussels. We need to do more here. I hope, Madam Vice-President, that you will be able to say a few words at the end of this debate about what you are planning in specific terms, for it is our common goal, and that is a message which we must convey in 2008 in particular.
There is another important sentence which is also to be found towards the end of the document. It talks about social problems and the social dimension of the EU in the context of globalisation, in particular jobs and migration and citizens' concerns. Unfortunately, Mr President, the document you have presented to us does not contain many answers to these questions. This is not just a matter for the Social Affairs Commissioner, who is also doing good work. This dimension must be addressed by the Commission as a whole. Indeed, it is a matter for the President of the Commission himself. He, too, must focus on achieving this social Europe.
There are many areas involved here, and I would like to cite just two of them. One of them is international trade. Is it not a scandal that there are still European companies which are reliant on child labour in India and other countries? What are we doing to tackle this? This situation creates fears here in Europe and exacerbates poverty. That is borne out by various studies: it exacerbates poverty in countries which are our trading partners. In other words, trade policy must also include a social dimension, perhaps by means of social clauses.
As to immigration policy, your document talks about 'an integrated approach to migration'. Would it not be better to say: 'no migration without integration'? Indeed, should the Commission not have been sending out a much clearer and unequivocal message here? Yesterday, we discussed this issue with Commissioner Frattini. His initial comments about the situation of the Roma population in Rome, for example, were not very encouraging. His statements yesterday were much clearer and more helpful. Is it not the case that the Roma issue is also one which we have often neglected, not only in the new Member States but in the old ones as well?
Mrs Merkel and Mr Sarkozy are saying 'no migration policy without integration policy'. Surely this is an approach which the Commission should have adopted long ago? I doubt that Mr Sarkozy and Mrs Merkel mean the same thing as we Social Democrats do when they talk about integration. Nonetheless, the basic message is absolutely correct and the Commission must adopt a much clearer approach here."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples