Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2008-06-05-Speech-4-043"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20080605.2.4-043"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, I will continue in French. Perhaps Mr Schulz does not agree, but I believe that President Sarkozy provided the impulse for the Union for the Mediterranean. That is why I think that for once I am nevertheless going to continue to speak in that language.
I apologise, Mr President, but as I said at the beginning, this debate has provoked strong reactions.
First of all, I see, ladies and gentlemen, that this debate or this matter has provoked strong reactions. Everyone has something to say on the issue and that is extremely important. It is true, as far as I am concerned, that peace could perhaps hang in the balance in the Mediterranean. It is also true that there is still a gap between the two shores: it is shrinking but it is still there. We must take account of the progress that has been made: macro-economic stability, lower inflation, greatly improved human rights. Naturally, there is still a great deal to be done. On the one hand, reforms are badly needed and these reforms must be more rapid and more comprehensive. In addition, the issue of trade and investment is vital. I do not agree with Mr Wurtz that the Barcelona Process is dead. No, as I have always said, it has been very difficult to implement it because of the existing political problems, and that is true. When there was discussion of the political problems, as we know, it was about the Barcelona Process. Unfortunately, these problems will remain even if we try to overcome these issues with very specific projects, which is something I support. I therefore believe that this idea is a good idea and I think that we have renewed it through a pragmatic and concrete approach that is, of course, fully inclusive.
As regards free trade and the free trade agreements, ladies and gentlemen, I must point out that as a result of the excessively long transition periods, 2010 is the first year in which we will be able to implement these agreements. In fact, we still do not have any free trade agreements. As far as agriculture is concerned, we are in the middle of negotiations but it is very complicated, for the other side too, because it involved not just giving, but also receiving. These negotiations are always difficult. Free trade agreements with Tunisia and Israel will enter into force in 2010. A similar agreement with Morocco is being finalised, but considerable efforts are still needed. The last country concerned will be Egypt. You can thus see that things are moving very slowly, and that is not because of the process; it is because of the countries themselves, which do not wish to move any faster. That is important to point out. In spite of everything, this new idea is a good idea, an opportunity, and I hope that the partners are going to make use of it. It is true, too, Mrs Isler-Béguin, that the partners clearly have to want to dance. That is why the Commission spoke with each of them to ensure that its proposals reflected their concerns and their point of view.
When it comes to human rights, ladies and gentlemen, I must point out that I myself would not have done anything if there had been no human rights. However, the Barcelona Process remains; that is the idea. The institutions are also involved. In principle, the institutions play a role, and that applies to the Anna Lindt Foundation, too. Of course, the Anna Lindt Foundation is present, and with a new presidency and a new director these aspects should be further enhanced. These things are not lost. The Neighbourhood Policy that I mentioned, which is a bilateral policy, also remains of course, because through its action plans it is genuinely trying to strengthen and promote the reforms. Do not think, therefore, that it is not involved. That is the real value added of the projects that we have actually implemented and emphasised.
As regards the Euro-Mediterranean University in Portorož, I think first of all that it is an excellent idea by the Slovenian Presidency. I am personally going to attend its inauguration; I have been invited to it and I fully intend to be there.
As regards funding, first and foremost, since it is a Slovenian idea, it is only natural that Slovenia must also make a contribution to it, which it will do to the tune of EUR 1 million. I have also been asked for a contribution, which is why I have tried to find something among funds that, in principle, are already allocated. That is far from easy. I have found EUR 1 million, which I am going to add to this project. However, there are other instruments and I have informed the presidency of them. Firstly, there are the Structural Funds and Cohesion Fund, which simply need to be re-distributed in Slovenia, and secondly, there are the funds for research and education. Thus there are funds available. In addition, you are of course all aware of the Erasmus grants, which are still applicable. That is something new that we are going to strengthen.
I would like to talk briefly about culture, Madam. I think that someone mentioned that Robert Schuman once said that if we were to start building the European Union again, we should start with culture. That is true, but while there is so much poverty, so much illiteracy, etc., we have to do other things, too, and I can repeat what I said in relation to human rights: all the culture programmes remain in place and there is quite a number of them.
Finally, I will say a brief word on the secretariat because that was a very precise question. In the light of the different views expressed, we concluded that, as indicated in our communication, the secretariat should be asked to perform the role of making proposals for joint initiatives, which would then be adopted by political bodies, and ensuring the necessary follow-up of project-related decisions taken by the heads of state or government. The secretariat could also have a separate legal personality with an autonomous status. The detailed modalities have yet to be clarified.
I will conclude with a few words on the nuclear issue. Madam, the Memorandum of Understanding that our President signed with the IAEA, the International Atomic Energy Agency in Vienna, relates to safety and security. I personally support it and I think that everyone should because we cannot choose what energy sources the countries use. Each country has the right, as you said, to have some reservations about nuclear energy, and you know that we ourselves do. However, the countries must at least have the opportunity to do as they wish. As such, safety and security are crucial, and those are the issues dealt with by the Memorandum."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples