Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2007-11-14-Speech-3-384"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20071114.36.3-384"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, everyone has thanked our honourable colleague Mr Zaleski, and I shall do likewise. His report was adopted in committee without a single dissenting vote, which shows that we can indeed produce a cross-party report if we try hard enough.
Allow me to make a few remarks. The Ukrainian elections have taken place. They were democratic, they were fair and they were free, but I believe they have left a host of problems unresolved. The incumbent President has always had difficulties in his dealings with strong prime ministers, whether with Yulia Tymoshenko, whom he dismissed in 2005, or with Viktor Yanukovych in 2006 and 2007.
Although the coalition agreement concluded between Yulia Tymoshenko’s alliance and the
bloc exists on paper as the basis of a possible new government constellation, the government has not yet been formed. Nor do we know what will actually transpire, even though the deadline is now quite close. If this government is formed by then, its first task, in my view, is to tackle constitutional reform, for without reform of the Constitution there is no guarantee that the internal stability of the political forces in Ukraine will suffice to avoid another fresh set of elections, especially as some people are already thinking about calling for new parliamentary elections at the time of the presidential election.
If you look at certain areas, such as economic policy, the OECD report paints a truly encouraging picture. It tells us that Ukraine recorded average GDP growth of 8.7% between 2000 and 2006. If you look behind these figures, however, you will see a huge trade deficit. Ukraine has a deficit of more than EUR 4.5 billion in its trade with the countries of the CIS and a deficit of almost EUR 4.5 billion with the European Union. In other words, there is still a real need for economic change, and the partnership agreements can and must be used for that purpose.
On the other hand, compared with the statistics of a country such as my own – the Federal Republic of Germany – the Ukrainian figures do seem magnificent. Ukraine’s unemployment rate is lower, its GDP is growing faster, its welfare expenditure on pensions is higher, and it spends a higher percentage of its GDP on education, and hence on investment in the future, than the Federal Republic of Germany. There is therefore every reason to conclude that the country is unquestionably on the right path.
Nevertheless, I referred to problems in the economy, and there are, of course, problems in other areas too. Russia has clearly signalled and plainly stated that its energy prices will rise by 10% with effect from 1 January 2008. That will have a profound impact on the Ukrainian economy. At the present time, Ukraine pays its debts to Russia with gas supplies from its own underground deposits. We shall see how that develops. It will become a political issue again, and it is important for the European Union to intervene to keep the peace. The Russians are entitled to raise their prices, and it goes without saying that the Ukrainians will have to work out how to deal with the economic fallout.
Take another point, namely social policy. During the electoral campaign, all of the parties that stood for election announced vast increases in welfare spending. If you look at the present coalition agreement between the Tymoshenko alliance and the President’s bloc, you will see that there is no mention at all of an increase in welfare expenditure. And indeed it would be virtually impossible, given the present level of government revenue, to effect the promised spending increases. This means that Ukrainian development is not advancing as quickly as is always asserted.
The next point to which I wish to refer is foreign policy. During the election campaign, all parties promised to move the country closer to the European Union. The party that has always linked this convergence with the European Union most closely with the issue of accession to NATO, namely the
party, was the one that suffered the heaviest losses. An absolute majority of the Ukrainian population are opposed to membership of NATO. I therefore ask the European Union to proceed cautiously here. The majority of the population do not want their country to join NATO. All the available data indicate that they do want it to join the WTO.
If we consider, against this backdrop, how the partnership agreements should now be shaped, the real needs emerge in the areas where Ukraine still has the difficulties I have listed. Ukraine must – and here I agree entirely with Mr Zaleski – have a European perspective, a prospect of accession to the EU. It would be good for the European Union to have a strong partner in the East, and it would also be good for Ukraine in view of its general geostrategic orientation."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
"Our Ukraine"1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples