Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2009-12-16-Speech-3-019"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20091216.3.3-019"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, firstly, I will not be talking this morning about institutional matters, as others before me have done. We will certainly have time to discuss these matters, since the Council is apparently going to implement a protocol that requires an intergovernmental conference. We must think about whether or not we want a conference. I believe that we in the European Parliament will nonetheless have a few ideas on this subject to ensure that we make progress with European democracy and that we compensate for the lack of transparency and democracy in the cooptations being proposed.
That being said, I should especially like to thank the Presidency, Prime Minister Reinfeldt and Mrs Malmström for the excellent relations they have maintained with Parliament and for their fine management of what were, after all, very difficult issues – I am, of course, talking about the ratification of the Treaty of Lisbon. We even had to overcome the ‘Klaus obstacle’; from now on, we will talk about the Klaus obstacle and the excellent way in which the Swedish Presidency solved that problem.
Secondly, I believe that the other most important element is the Stockholm Programme, which has been adopted and which now needs to be implemented. However, for you, Mr Reinfeldt, the Presidency does not end here of course, since there is still the Copenhagen Summit, where you must gain some ground.
I would like to send out, today, before this House, an optimistic and purposeful message, which somewhat contradicts what we read in today’s press. Today’s press is characterised by pessimism: will an agreement be reached or not? I believe that an agreement is possible because serious partners are out there, and we must try to find and motivate them.
The fact that President Obama and the Chinese Prime Minister are arriving tomorrow and the day after tomorrow testifies to their will to reach an agreement. I believe that we must follow a strategy. Which one, though, ladies and gentlemen? I believe that we must follow a strategy whereby we try to establish three-way cooperation between the United States, China and Europe.
If, in the next two days, these three reach an initial agreement, then we will have a serious basis on which to convince the others – India, Brazil and the other countries – to join in this effort. I therefore call for a proactive approach. The most important thing is to strive for this three-way alliance, which is necessary in order to reach an agreement, and to propose, from the outset, a 30% reduction in emissions. A sense of purpose must be shown in this proposal.
In my view, we must let ourselves be guided, in this final phase of the negotiations, in Copenhagen, by Hegel, who said that it is not the impossible that drives one to despair, but what was possible but was not achieved. I believe that, with the Swedish Presidency’s persistence, we will achieve success at the Copenhagen Summit."@en1
|
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples