Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2009-05-05-Speech-2-236"
Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
---|---|
rdf:type | |
dcterms:Date | |
dcterms:Is Part Of | |
dcterms:Language | |
lpv:document identification number |
"en.20090505.22.2-236"2
|
lpv:hasSubsequent | |
lpv:speaker | |
lpv:translated text |
"Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, as some Members have already said, this is the last time that they will be here, in plenary session, at a debate preceding a European Council. I will not be able to see them in July, or September, since the mandate for this Commission comes to a close at the end of October, as you know.
The other issue that we need to resolve concerns our response to the economic question. I think we also need to realise that in this instance, presenting new programmes on a daily basis does not show real responsibility. That is a mistake. I believe that leadership is mostly an exercise in responsibility; it is not just about playing to the gallery.
It would be easy for the Commission to present new ideas every day, knowing full well that they would have no chance of implementation. We will not do that however, because in our capacity as the European Commission, representing European general interest, we consider our task to be more than merely taking the easy option or staging publicity stunts. We want to propose real measures and guidelines that have a chance of bringing Europe together as a whole, with the other institutions, Parliament and Council, and rallying together the citizens of Europe.
If truth be told, it is the Commission that ultimately put forward the initial proposals for a European recovery plan, using all the instruments at its disposal. As you know, most of these instruments fall within the scope of Member States, such as the national budgets. The European budget is minimal in relation to the national budgets.
Perhaps some of those who are impatient and demand a lot of us can assist the Commission during the next financial perspectives, in convincing the Member States, particularly where the parties voted for a maximum of 1% of their resources – the 1% club who have put a limit on their financial resources. Now
is something that would be worth achieving during the next parliamentary term.
I can confirm that we have a plan of action for 2009; we will submit guidelines for the financial review and for our future action plan. However, there is no point asking the European institutions for what they cannot provide at this stage.
It would be better to ask us what we
do, and I mean this very sincerely, because I feel that certain criticisms which come from people who share the same European ideals as me, are fundamentally flawed in their constant criticism of what Europe has not yet done; you know very well that if Europe has not yet done it, it is not the fault of Community institutions, but rather due to a lack of ambition at national level. It is not fair to criticise in this way, nor does it make our job any easier, which is to move the European project forward.
The truth is that the Commission has put forward some ambitious proposals, that we constantly monitor the economic situation, and that we will present further proposals when they prove necessary. Now, however, we believe that the important thing is to concentrate on the execution – as I have said – the execution and implementation of what we have decided on, and not just token gestures, because we also have some very serious concerns in relation to stability, with public debt reaching a truly alarming level throughout Europe. The situation in a number of our Member States is very serious, and for this reason we must put forward proposals that can address these issues.
I also believe that we must support the work that Europe is doing. I realise that there is a huge temptation to go against Europe at times in matters of immediate policy, and particularly in the context of the European elections, especially for those who are members of opposition parties in their own countries.
I ask you to think carefully, because tomorrow you will have power, tomorrow you can ask the citizens to vote for Europe, and they will not vote for a Europe that you have described as tribal. The people will vote for a Europe that has the support of all the political forces on the right, the left, and in the centre, and which is reflected in the European project.
That, in my opinion, is a huge challenge. I am in favour of a political Europe but I am opposed to politicking in relation to the European project. I am also against improper political divides in partisan terms. The truth is that we can only build Europe through large political families. The Commission is made up of these families: the PPE, the socialists, the social democrats, the liberals, and other independents. The Commission will continue to operate in this way. I realise that, from the point of view of immediate policy, particularly in the European Parliament, and in the context of the European Parliament elections, we all want to highlight our own programme, and our own party.
I should therefore like to address in particular all those who have worked on the European project, who are members of the European Parliament, and say to them once again: You can be proud of the work accomplished by the European Parliament.
I myself am a party man. I was elected to the Portuguese Parliament at the age of 29. I have served as opposition leader and Prime Minister. Hence, I am clearly a party man. Bear in mind, though, that European politics needs party people who are also able to go beyond their own party, who can set up coalitions that go beyond the different party positions. If we are supranational, we must also have a vision that goes beyond that of our own party.
That is what I wanted to warn you against, and I say this with all due respect, since I am aware that most of you are busy with an election campaign at the moment, which can be very demanding at times of major national challenges. I think that is important for the future. If we want to understand the huge challenges for Europe, we must unite all the Europeans on the left, the right, and the centre, all those who support the basics of the European project, and we must not succumb to this upsurge of partisan dramatisation, because in fact, most of the time it is artificial.
I can tell you that the proposals on hedge funds, which some of you have criticised, were the subject of a consensus within the Commission, between all the Commissioners, members of the socialist family, members of the liberal family and members of the PPE. There was no division on this matter. Therefore, although I understand that in terms of the political battle it makes sense to focus criticism on this or that Commissioner, I do not believe that it is fair from a political point of view, or from an intellectual point of view.
To finish, I would like to say that I admire the founding fathers more and more. Let us be clear about the truth: the Czech Republic is facing a political problem. The Deputy Prime Minister, Mr Vondra, has shown great honesty by clearly admitting it. It is clearly very difficult for a country that holds the Presidency of the Union to have to deal with an internal political crisis, and to replace its own government. The truth is that in spite of that we are on the way to achieving good results, thanks to you, the European Parliament. I think I can allow myself to say that it is also thanks to us, the Commission, in a small way, for the proposals that we have put forward. However, it is also thanks to the Czech Presidency. We are in the process of finalising 50 codecision cases, some of which are extremely difficult. We are able to do this whilst the country holding the Presidency is in full political crisis. I think that we should pay tribute to the institutional capacity of Europe, by virtue of which, even in a situation such as this, the European Council is capable of delivering results.
This is why, when I just now paid tribute to the Czech Presidency, and in particular, to Deputy Prime Minister Vondra, I meant it with great sincerity, because I know that it is extremely difficult, as I have witnessed every day, to work under these conditions and still manage to come up with results. This is why there is a choice to make here. Whilst recognising that, for the most ambitious of us, including myself, we have not yet reached the objectives we set ourselves, we also need to emphasise what we have actually done, and what we have been able to do together. Others, for their part, focus mainly on what it has not yet been possible to do. The message that they are sending to the citizens of Europe is constantly negative. As I have often said, the pessimism of the pro-Europeans is sometimes more worrying than the Euroscepticism of the anti-Europeans, because it does not convey a message of hope for those who believe in Europe.
I should now like to say, before the Deputy Prime Minister, Mr Vondra, whom I wish to thank for his speeches, before the Czech Presidency and before all of you, that I should like to thank you for what we have managed to accomplish together, despite all our differences of opinion, for Europe, which is a major project for peace, freedom, and solidarity.
If we take a step back and assess the work done during this parliamentary term, I believe that we can all be proud of it. The truth is that Europe has led the way in many areas, such as the fight against climate change, the struggle for a new policy on energy security, and in all matters relating to the response to the financial and economic crisis, which is affecting Europe very seriously indeed. However, I have not heard much about any of this yet today.
This crisis is affecting the United States, and indeed it began there. It is affecting Russia, Japan, and even China. It is affecting the emerging markets. Europe has tried from the start to react to this crisis, not only in the short term, but also via programmes tackling the bigger questions of regulation and supervision.
This is the message that I should like to get across to you here today. Given the current electoral period, some of you have issued me challenges, but I believe that I cannot, nor should not, take up these challenges now. The future Commission must, of course, develop its own programme, but it is not for me, now, to tell you what will be in the next Commission’s manifesto.
Therefore, I accept your challenge; I take it as a sign of confidence, moreover. However, I cannot respond to this challenge at present. I believe that, by assessing the track record of this parliamentary term, we have good reason to be proud. However, I would now prefer to concentrate on the June European Council, which has to deal with some very important questions indeed, requiring huge responsibility.
Firstly, there is the question of the Treaty of Lisbon and the transition that we need to make from one parliamentary term to another, and there is also the question of the constitution of a new Commission. It is an extremely delicate challenge, as some of you have said, since we do not have the Treaty of Lisbon in place yet, a Treaty signed but not yet ratified by the 27 governments.
That is not the European Parliament’s fault, nor is it the Commission’s fault. The truth is that these governments have signed a Treaty that they were not in a position to endorse definitively, and due to this setback, we have a serious problem as regards institutional transition. This is a problem that requires a huge sense of responsibility on all sides: Council, Parliament and Commission.
That is why I welcome the wise words of the Czech Presidency, as well as the Members who stated their official position on this matter. We need to find solutions that fully comply with the current treaty; we are a Community based on the rule of law, we cannot suspend a treaty that is already in force. In full compliance with the law, we must find sensitive solutions that guarantee the stability of the European project. I will be calling on the Heads of State or Government at the European Council in June, to discuss this subject."@en1
|
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata | |
lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples