Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2009-09-15-Speech-2-130"

PredicateValue (sorted: default)
rdf:type
dcterms:Date
dcterms:Is Part Of
dcterms:Language
lpv:document identification number
"en.20090915.15.2-130"2
lpv:hasSubsequent
lpv:speaker
lpv:spokenAs
lpv:translated text
"I would like, first of all, to thank all those who spoke in the discussion for their extraordinary support. I understand that we may, in some specific cases, have different views. This is very good, because it always yields something new. Only an exchange of views, only a difference of views and discussion can give us answers to the most difficult questions. Yet the tremendous support which was expressed in the House during the speeches puts me under an additional obligation, because I understand that we stand before great challenges, and we must overcome them all. You have given me a mandate, an exceptional and strong mandate, and at an exceptional time. I should like to stress very strongly that I realise this and that I am aware of my responsibilities over the next two and a half years of work, not only that of the European Parliament, but of the entire European Union, and also for the impression our citizens have of our work, which is incredibly important. Mr Gollnisch does not doubt the sincerity of my intentions, but does he wonder whether they are realistic. I would like to say that 30 or 40 years ago, it was completely unrealistic to think that I should ever stand before such a comprehensive body and be answering your questions. It was so devoid of realism that I did not even dare dream of it. So we see that if we proceed on a particular course with profound faith and conviction, then those impossible things become possible. Let us endeavour to make the impossible become possible. Mrs Malmström – yes, we are working with the Swedish Presidency. I have already been to Sweden. We talked about climate change, about the climate in Europe in general, about the crisis and about unemployment. There is also a very important programme – the Stockholm Programme. Let us remember this. Parliament has a lot to accomplish in the Stockholm Programme, including in the area of organised crime, and not only within the European Union. There is no doubt that we are going to work together with Mr Barroso. I like his offer very much. Mr Silvestris spoke of the brief history of the liberation of Europe, and I fully share his opinion. Mr Siwiec mentioned Ukraine. Actually, as far as I am concerned, this is an obvious matter, because I was part of the European Union delegation to Ukraine. I went to Ukraine three times, as you remember, and I did not want to go into this. Please remember that, for Europeans, every aspect of European cooperation is important: in the Mediterranean region, with Latin America and with the United States, but most important of all are our neighbours. Our neighbours are found around the Mediterranean Sea and in Eastern Europe. These are the main areas, Eastern and Southern Europe, but let us not argue about which is more important. Elections are approaching in Ukraine, and so for the next six months, Ukraine will certainly be the most important. However, let us not contend with one another in this way. It is very important that we maintain a balance. I fully endorse your opinion on this matter. Mrs Lichtenberger spoke of the role of Parliament when we make law. I agree, I agree that we must make law transparently, we must have our own opinion, but that is already declared by Lisbon. If the Treaty of Lisbon comes into force, this will happen automatically. Mr Balczó asks if a unified Europe really does exist to the extent that I said in my speech. Yes, indeed, it does exist, and it is united, but it is still in the process of solving, in partnership, the problems of agriculture. I said firmly that the EU has funds for promoting cohesion. Since we have united, let us not break up in another way, as a result of a lack of reciprocity in the opportunities for citizens to develop. We will endeavour to achieve this. Some countries of the European Union have been members for 20 or 30 years and are still part of these programmes, and we all have the same rights. It is really a united Europe in which we have different standards of living. We will even out these differences, this is our hope and it is an opportunity for us, but let us now speak of a Community and also of our responsibility. I wanted to stress this very strongly. Mrs Roithová spoke about joint responsibility for the crisis, and I fully concur. Besides, we live so close to one another that there is almost no barrier to our understanding of each other already. This is extremely important for us. Mr Tannock mentioned a Human Rights Commissioner. This is, of course, a question to be decided by the Commission President and the Commission. However, I am sure that we and Mr Tannock will meet in Ukraine in a couple of months when the presidential election is held. Mr Sógor spoke of bilateral European discussions, so I would like to say that, indeed, it is best to resolve the problems of minorities bilaterally. However, it is also better to open borders than to move them. In Europe, we have learned not to argue about borders, and in our part of Europe we do not have this problem. We have simply opened borders, and that is our goal – it is our greatest achievement. Mrs Dodds said that the European Union should be a Europe of cooperating nations, and not a federal union. You spoke very wisely. We are, indeed, talking about cooperation between nations. We are talking about the need to retain identity, but also of the need for mutual openness and cooperation. I like your ideas very much, and the European Union in its present form, as well as in its form under the Treaty of Lisbon, are doing exactly as you suggest. I would like to thank very warmly Mr Joseph Daul, Chairman of the Group of the European People’s Party (Christian Democrats). I very much appreciate the emphasis that it is our Europe. I consider myself to be one of those who have come here from Central and Eastern Europe, but today our common Europe requires corporate action. I do not forget where I have come from, but time is moving on so quickly. Integration requires that we feel a mutual responsibility, and that this responsibility also be borne by the new Member States – what we call the ‘new’ ones, although, as I said, there are no ‘new’ and ‘old’ ones. Mr Tabajdi spoke of the regions, and also of my region, Silesia, and said that it is in a certain sense a kind of mediator. I agree. If they are transborder regions, they give the opportunity for better mutual understanding. Mr Antinoro then spoke about the achievements of my country. Thank you for your remarks. Will I bring strength to the European Parliament? I certainly have the energy to do this, but what is definitely needed is the energy of over 700 fellow Members. I am counting on this completely, and I understand that all of us are ‘energetic’. Mr Ransdorf does really represent the citizens and the life of the nation. I agree, and this is why the responsibility and the powers of the European Parliament are growing. Let us also allow the national parliaments to have a strong influence on what is happening in Europe. Mr Theurer spoke of the pursuit of freedom on the one hand, and of attractiveness on the other. Yes, over here it was attractive, but over there we were striving for freedom. It is true. Please note that we have assuaged the situation in the Balkans, and today the Balkans are at peace. May God be praised. The countries of that region are queuing up to join the European Union, and this is the great attractiveness of the EU. Mrs Morvai recalled some dramatic events. If you would like to give me some information about this, please give it to me in writing. I can also meet with you to discuss this so that I have an understanding of this matter. Mr Tőkés spoke about 1956 and Hungary. We all care very much about those events, and about our profound faith in the EU. Yes, I, too, believe deeply in the strength of the European Union. Mr Olejniczak, however, asked a series of questions about inequality in Europe. We must definitely speak about unity, but on the other hand, all the funds of which I spoke earlier are still operating, as are all the measures which are intended to give us the opportunity to eliminate inequality. They remain in force; nothing has changed here. The situation itself remains as open and as clear as it ever was, and so it is a very good thing that we do have a united Europe. As for an answer concerning the supply of oil, gas, and energy resources in general, we must speak about a common energy policy. Unnecessary tensions will not then arise between us. These build unnecessary walls between us which, after all, we have been dismantling for decades, and that is what the future is about. This is why I propose most definitely a common energy policy. Of course, in order to accede to the European Union, there are criteria which need to be fulfilled. It was also said that, in order for others to join the EU, we in the EU must be well integrated, because then the reception of new Member States will be effective. We need time for integration, but a country like Croatia is, to a great extent, ready for integration. I understand that Croatia has a strong possibility of accession to the EU fairly quickly, although it has encountered certain problems. It may be the same with Iceland, but it is very difficult to determine time frames for other countries which are not so well prepared. Please remember that the countries of Central and Eastern Europe which are now in the EU started preparing for integration in 1991/1992, so it took 12 years. We prepared for integration for 12 years, and in fact we had better conditions than these countries currently have, because then the world situation was better – there was no crisis, and many other factors combined to give us a better situation. It takes a long time and I would not venture to give time frames, but let us remember that enlargement is a good European Union policy, although it is a long-term one. I would like once again to thank you all for the discussion. I have noted all the comments with great care, and they will now become a basis for thinking about certain modifications. Furthermore, we are going to meet regularly. I will sit here, where I am now, because I would like to be as close as possible to you all. Mr Schulz stressed that it is a two-and-a-half-year programme. That may be so. What I really had in mind is that we need continuity. In fact, I was speaking about what Europe should be like in five or ten years, and what direction we should be taking. In two and a half years the new President will add new priorities, or he will modify the present ones slightly, but let us always have before us a longer perspective, perhaps even ten or fifteen years, so that we can anticipate events which might sometimes surprise us. Of course, I do agree that the best enlargement is the kind that results from our internal integration. Mr Verhofstadt stressed the significance of the citizen’s voice. I feel the same. The voice of the citizens has enormous significance here. Parliament represents the citizens, hence our great responsibility. He also stressed that in response to the crisis, we should come together, including in economic affairs, and make decisions together, which is just the opposite of protectionism, and I, too, stressed this in my speech. Mrs Harms spoke of relations with national parliaments. We make over 50% of European law, which is then approved by national parliaments, so it is very important that we have good relations with the parliaments in our countries. Why? – because we need greater contact with the citizens. There is no doubt that those parliaments, our own, national parliaments, have significantly better contact with the citizens. They are shown on television every day, which is not always true of our Parliament. Let the citizens learn about the importance of what we create here in the European Parliament, and in the European Commission and the European Council. Let them know that Parliament is responsible for over half of the decisions concerning our countries. Thanks to the fact that we will, from now on, be very close to the national parliaments, it will be easier for us to convey this. The crisis does, of course, reveal an enormous lack of trust. This is really what it was about. Mrs Harms and I have the same opinion on the issue of our climate. We were both in Bali, we were both in Poznań, and we will both be in Copenhagen. We will work out an agreement. Mr Kamiński stressed that we have different views on the future of Europe. I agree with this, and we should indeed listen to each other. If you represent what are today fairly large groups of citizens who have a somewhat different view of the future of Europe, this warns us about something, it informs us about something, and we, or I, who believe in a European future and European integration, know significantly more about Europeans because you raise various kinds of objections. As far as this question is concerned, you may be sure that the debate will be thorough. Mrs Svensson spoke about the transparency of Parliament, that we must know what decisions we make, and that our electors must also know. I concur entirely. I have no doubt that the problem of social justice is important. I myself have roots in a trade union, which I was in for very many years, and it was an ordinary trade union. However, we know perfectly well that in order to have the right means to help the poorest, we must have a healthy economy, and that we always have to try to find a balance between the one and the other. Mr Speroni spoke about appropriate and worthy cooperation with the European Commission and the European Council. Please remember that Parliament is growing in significance. The Treaty of Lisbon guarantees us considerably more powers than we have at present. This is a good thing, because we are, in fact, representatives who have been elected directly by the citizens of the EU."@en1
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata
lpv:videoURI

Named graphs describing this resource:

1http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/English.ttl.gz
2http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/Events_and_structure.ttl.gz
3http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/spokenAs.ttl.gz

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph