Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2009-01-14-Speech-3-076"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20090114.3.3-076"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Thank you for giving me the floor. I would like to start my closing address by thanking you for all your views; it was a very warm welcome and one that I was not expecting. I would also like to note that the Czech Presidency and I myself, in my capacity as President of the European Council, will be in close contact and will work in close cooperation with the European Commission over the entire six months. The first fortnight has shown how continuous, daily and very active contact, not only with José Manuel Barroso, but also with the entire Commission, has secured joint action over the issues that descended upon us at the beginning of the year. I am referring here not only to our cooperation with the European Parliament, but in particular to our communication with the European Commission as we sought to handle these ad hoc issues. I would like to extend my gratitude to President Barroso.
I will actually comment on ‘A Europe without Barriers’. Yes, it is meant to have at least three senses. There is the economic sense, which involves the removal of barriers to the internal market, the mental or psychological sense, in other words the removal of barriers in the minds of Europeans, which is of course an objective of the recently acceding countries, and finally there is the removal of external barriers, the avoidance of protectionism, a genuine liberalisation of world trade as one of the tools for managing the crisis, boosting demand, and bringing about an effective realisation of the conclusions of the Washington G20.
I would like to say perhaps one thing here which affects me personally and which has already found its way into the media. Václav Havel is gravely ill and has been hospitalised. He is a man who symbolises both our pre-November and our post-November direction, and not just for the Czech Republic – he essentially symbolises the fall of the Iron Curtain. He was the first Czech to address this European Parliament, and on behalf of us all I would like to wish him a speedy recovery.
I have a few very specific responses for one honourable Member of this assembly. I was touched by Mr Rouček’s concern for the Czech government, and I could list at least six examples from the last ten to fifteen years where countries holding the Presidency of the European Union had many internal problems yet enjoyed a successful Presidency. There was Belgium at the time the Maastricht Treaty entered into force, where constitutional changes took place without affecting the Presidency, there was the time of the French Presidency, when the European Union was enlarged to include Sweden, Finland and Austria while France was suffering an internal political crisis, there was the time of the Amsterdam Treaty in 1999, during the German Presidency, when Gerhard Schröder was facing major problems and Lafontaine quit his party, there was the time the euro was introduced during the Spanish Presidency headed by José María Aznar, there was the time of the Irish Presidency, and I could mention many more. Do not worry about the internal problems of Czech politics; they will not affect the Czech Presidency.
On the Nuclear Forum: we cannot have a nuclear debate in which the dispute between the greens, liberals, conservatives, and so on ends up in a forced result. The Nuclear Forum, organised in cooperation with the European Commission and taking place in Bratislava and Prague, should launch a new debate on security, on opportunities, on risks and needs, and on all of those things that have actually become a little taboo in recent years. Breaking down this taboo is actually the objective of the Slovak-Czech Nuclear Forum. It is obvious why Prime Minister Fico is in Ukraine and Moscow; the problems of Bulgaria and Slovakia are critical because they are countries wholly dependent on gas supplies from Ukraine. Bulgaria is capable of storing only a third of the capacity it requires, Slovakia has already reduced production at thousands of businesses, its thermal power plant in Nováky has burned out and it is suffering a major crisis. I am in daily contact with Robert Fico and I support his mission, even though I do not think it will be successful at this time. We must be much tougher towards the two players, Ukraine and Russia, Naftohaz and Gazprom. Furthermore, I believe that the next steps must be far more effective and tougher on the part of both the European Commission and the Czech Presidency. We must look for the tools to overcome a number of technical problems. It is not possible for these supplies not to be resumed for a wholly irrelevant reason (that is, the use of technical gas), and we will be taking further action in this respect.
We talked a lot about the Balkans and related problems, and many questions were raised in this respect. Mr Peterle knows full well that, if the chapters in Croatia’s accession process are to be unblocked, a bilateral solution must be found to the Slovenian-Croatian dispute. This is not a European dispute, although it is in fact starting to interfere with the accession talks. In this sense, my contacts with the two prime ministers and the two presidents, together with my personal input into this problem, will perhaps help to resolve the Slovenian-Croatian border problems.
There is much that I would still like to say, but I will try not to keep you much longer. I will attempt to make way for your next proceedings. I would like to end by saying that we greatly appreciate the opportunity to belong to a community of states built on values and on foundations that we, after November 1989, have been able to adopt once more as our own values and our own goals. We also value the opportunity to preside over this entire community. It is something so unique, something my generation, which was 33 years old in 1989, never thought it would live to see. We also appreciate the fact that we can tackle many problems. What we value most of all is the internal liberal debate. This is the freedom which allows us to articulate these problems within a spectrum of views which is relevant to their solution. I can unequivocally declare here that Tomas Garrigue Masaryk has said that ‘democracy is discussion’. I am keen to follow in the footsteps of the first Czechoslovak president; I remain absolutely open to this discussion. I thank you for your attention today and look forward to meeting you again.
Before I came here, I swore I would tell no jokes. The one joke I did tell, which everyone at home would laugh at, fell flat. Never mind, I will keep on trying and perhaps eventually even the German translation will get it right and we will understand one another.
The Treaty of Lisbon cannot be a mantra. It must be a means, not an end. It is a means to improve the working of the European Union. It must never be a matter of compulsion. Each country has its own tools and rules of the game for achieving ratification. The fact that I signed the Treaty does not mean that I will influence the decisions of the two chambers of the Czech Parliament, which are autonomous and free and will decide for themselves. Likewise, we have no intention of exerting advance pressure on the decision of the Irish people. It is impossible to impose the validity of the Treaty in any way, although I do think that the Treaty is needed at this time and will facilitate the working of the European Union. That is my final observation on the matter and I will not return to it because I have explained my personal position.
I liked the quote delivered by the honourable Member Mr Kirkhope, and I will paraphrase another of Churchill’s quotes to demonstrate what I think of the current time: ‘No more crises tomorrow, my diary is already full.’ I think what we have been through in the first few weeks shows that we chose our priorities correctly and that we were well prepared. Besides, we began to address the gas issue in mid-December, during the French Presidency.
I apologise to all those honourable Members whose specific questions I do not answer; I will try to generalise this discussion a little and I will try to shed light rather on the general approach to handling these specific problems.
The question of smuggling people, drugs and children, child trafficking and the like. Just as this Parliament is holding a debate regarding levels of freedom and security, so is the Czech Republic and we are keen to accelerate the directives and the entire legislative plan within the framework of Council decisions to combat people smuggling. I just want to say that we are ready for this and want to address the individual elements of these problems.
The large-scale discussion on Nabucco. We must concede, in all honesty, that Nabucco will be an alternative to other transit routes only if it also provides an alternative source of supply. As for the debate on Ukraine, my countryman Josef Zieleniec said it quite clearly – this is a political and geopolitical problem, and in my opinion if we do not give Ukraine a chance to resolve its internal problems, if we do not place restrictions on the conduct of the various players, whether they be individuals or firms in the gas market, then we could lose the pro-European orientation of Ukraine, which is, of course, a geopolitical problem. We can only speculate on the goals of the whole crisis – perhaps only a short-term price increase, maybe much greater pressure to build the Nord Stream, the alternative northern route, or perhaps the aim really is to inhibit Ukraine’s European inclinations. Whatever the case, these factors are part of the problem, which is not just short-term and is not just about energy.
If I had to respond to the reference as to whether Europe should be more liberal or more socialist, I would attempt one more joke and say that I propose a compromise of a liberal-conservative Europe, but that really is my last joke.
With regard to the path followed by the Czech Republic and the adoption of the euro, on 1 January I declared that the Czech Republic would announce its date of entry on 1 November this year. My government is the first government that will meet the Maastricht criteria. I do not look on this as a race. I congratulate my Slovak counterparts, and we will wait to see how the financial crisis affects compliance with the rules of the Stability and Growth Pact and what sort of effect it has on the
fulfilment of all the rules governing the euro area. I am concerned – and this also applies to the handling of the financial crisis – that the loosening of the EU’s own rules is a destructive step, and therefore when we talk of a Europe of rules, we will naturally insist on compliance with the directives on state aid and competition, and this will be one of the criteria for assessing all proposals on how to address the financial crisis. Rules apply in good times and in bad, and they apply to everyone. Equality here must be absolute."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata | |
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples