Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2008-01-16-Speech-3-474"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20080116.19.3-474"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Madam President, I must say that was one of the best debates I have ever had, and at this very late moment of the day.
I shall now move on to energy. Of course, it is a very important region for energy, and we need coordinated decisions by many – by state and by private players – for long-distance pipelines. You know that the Commission uses South Caucasus and Black Sea regional cooperation to facilitate decisions and to diversify sources and routes of supply. This includes contacts, for instance, regarding the trans-Caspian gas pipeline, Nabucco. You know there is now a coordinator, but, again, it is not only the Commission. It is a matter of the Commission and the Member States. And again, some Member States have already gone for some different ideas, which are not always within our unified approach.
I think another very important aspect is port development. This is high on our agenda in the framework of our Motorways of the Sea programme. So this will also be reflected in the next phase of the TRACECA project.
Let me now answer Mr Beazley. Yes, indeed, there is also the role of intercultural dialogue in this respect. But, for instance, yesterday I was in Madrid, where the Alliance of Civilisations was launched, which is now a project on a global scale, within the framework of the United Nations. Certainly, one of the local and regional aspects will be this aspect, but I think we should put it into this new global framework.
Then, on the other hand, you mentioned NGO exchanges. On this, I can tell you that the Black Sea cross-border cooperation programme already supports contact between NGOs. The Commission is planning some NGO events this year concerning economic cooperation and freedom of the press, and we are cooperating closely in this field with the Black Sea Forum, an initiative of Romania.
Finally, I think what Mr Beazley mentioned about history books is certainly one of those interesting elements. By the way, of course, for the many projects that are being mentioned facility funds are necessary. Therefore, we have created in the neighbourhood policy the Neighbourhood Investment Fund which, in principle, targets the South and the East. But within regional cooperation there is also a possibility for projects to be brought up.
I think these are the major points that I would like to make at this stage, but I am sure we can come back to this topic again, maybe after the meetings have taken place. And you also know that we are trying, at least as a Commission, to facilitate the questions of how we can help to resolve the frozen conflicts. This is, of course, a much more difficult area, because every one is very different, but we are at least trying with our projects to help and to get the right environment in order to facilitate settlements. We do hope, together with the Member States and the Council, to come to a good solution.
It was about the European neighbourhood policy, which is already there. Many of you have said the European Union has to do a lot, but the European Union has done a lot, as others have said. I would like to thank the two rapporteurs, Ms Anastase and Ms Polfer, because I think you have brought about a very interesting debate.
But what is the new element of this Black Sea synergy? It is the regional element and, as was rightly said by some Members who unfortunately are no longer here; it was under the German Presidency, to which I would like to pay tribute, that there was the idea of having a regional dimension. This is now the regional dimension of the bilateral part of the neighbourhood policy to the east. That means that, to achieve a synergy, we are trying to bring together not only the neighbourhood policy countries, but also two other very important players: Turkey and Russia.
Therefore, it is not a strategy but a synergy, because there are, of course, different strategies. If you think: we have a neighbourhood policy, we have a particular strategy towards Russia and, of course, we have a candidate country – Turkey. But, still, we think that a policy on working together is very important.
In the framework of the troika, I am going, together with other colleagues, to this region very soon – I think in two weeks’ time – and I will certainly take a lot of what has been said here with me.
I shall now come to a few points, because there is such a lot to be said that I could speak for another half an hour, but I do not want to do that, because I think we have had a very interesting debate, and a lot will have to be said in the future.
Trade is one of the important parts. You have spoken about energy, about transport, about climate change, as I have myself. There are other aspects, but trade is a very important one, and there is a feasibility study on trade already on the way. There is a Commission initiative. What is the aim? The aim is to evaluate the prospect of further trade openings, for instance in the case of Georgia, in the case of Armenia, but of course we have to see how things are going to evolve. This is one thing.
Secondly, my personal idea when I presented the neighbourhood policy in one of my last communications – not in the very last but the one before – was to say that we need an economic neighbourhood area, an economic space, and this is also what some Members have mentioned here. So the idea is to have a sort of free trade in the future. But of course we have to get there step by step.
An area of justice, freedom and liberty will also be there in future, but, of course, it is again a step-by-step approach. Many have spoken about a visa policy. I can tell you that, as a Commission, we have been quite open to that. But you know very well that this is the Member States’ competence, so if you speak about visa fees, you know there is a possibility for Member States, in principle, to concede visa freedom and there is also a possibility for Member States to say they would like to go ahead with visa facilitation. But it is clearly not the competence of the Commission. I just wanted to mention that, because the Commission is always addressed on things where it has tried but has not gone further because of the realities."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples