Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2010-09-07-Speech-2-022"

PredicateValue (sorted: default)
rdf:type
dcterms:Date
dcterms:Is Part Of
dcterms:Language
lpv:document identification number
"en.20100907.4.2-022"2
lpv:hasSubsequent
lpv:speaker
lpv:translated text
"Mr President, I have listened to you all very closely and with great interest. I have tried to see which, essentially, were the fundamental questions. At the start of this year, we even co-organised a ministerial meeting on the issue of the Roma. I believe that only two or three ministers, for the whole of Europe, were present at this ministerial meeting. Mrs Reding represented the Commission. We have important support programmes for providing help to the Roma and assisting their integration. We are in constructive and serious dialogue with all the governments in Europe, both with the governments of countries from which Roma originate and governments of countries in which Roma currently have a significant presence. I believe I can ask you quite sincerely not to play politics with this question. This is an extremely sensitive issue and an extremely serious one. We Europeans will not be helping if we polarise discussion of such a sensitive issue. We have said – I said it just now very clearly – that the principled position of the Commission and the European Union is to oppose all forms of discrimination. It is totally unacceptable. However, when it comes to responding to questions that are being asked in some of our countries, we must also say that all our citizens have rights and obligations. Furthermore, we must always stress the balance between freedom, particularly freedom of movement, and security. If we do not respect this balance, we run the serious risk of this issue being instrumentalised by extremist forces which will be able to exploit, in a populist manner, the feeling of insecurity which exists in many of our societies. Therefore, let us provide a serious and responsible answer, and let us always avoid using an extremely serious and extremely sensitive issue for political purposes. The Commission will take this position of responsibility. That is why I believe that we have an immense amount of work to do. If the criticism that some people have directed at me is that I am seeking consensus between the main European political forces, then that is a criticism that I am happy to accept. In fact, the Commission must represent the general European interest, and we must try to represent this same general interest by trying to obtain the contribution of different pro-European political forces. That is what we are doing. There was discussion of the budget. I heard your speeches. It seems to me that most of you want an ambitious budget for Europe. However, ladies and gentlemen, let us also be extremely clear here: the Commission will bring forward an ambitious budget, but we must not simply hold this debate here, in the European Parliament – we must win over European public opinion. Therefore, I ask for your help and support so that we can explain, in our countries, to the political forces which form the governments in our capitals, why – as Mr Daul rightly said, by the way – very often the euros that we spend at European level in fact constitute a saving compared with the many euros that we might spend at national level. This battle with public opinion is one that we must win, by having a democratic debate in our countries. This is why I ask for your support so that this debate can take place with the political forces that you represent, not just in Strasbourg or Brussels, but also in the capitals, because we must reach a consensus between Parliament and the Council. The various institutions must reach an agreement. The Commission will be there. The Commission will bring forward ambitious proposals, but always in a true spirit of partnership for a stronger Europe, a Europe of cooperation and not a Europe of division. In substance, I believe that, at least, the majority of this Parliament clearly wants more Europe, wants the Community method and wants more ambition. No specific criticism was levelled at the Commission’s proposals. Some people have said that they would have preferred a speech analysing the situation. Rather than commenting on the past and the present, I prefer to construct the future. I believe that the most important thing is not to comment – I leave that to the commentators, for whom I have a lot of respect, by the way – but I believe that our role, the role of the Commission, is to make proposals. For me, the speech on the state of the Union also concerns the state to which we want to lead the Union with our joint efforts. That is what I presented to you today, with specific and ambitious proposals. I do not want to evade any questions, however. It is true that the Union is currently at a turning point. It is true that we have a new treaty. It is also true that some people at national level pursue a purely intergovernmental interpretation of these institutions. We have already clearly defined our vision, and – as I said in my speech, by the way – I am in favour of the Community method and spirit. However, the best way of pursuing the latter is not to engage in endless discussions on the institutions, and still less to engage in institutional guerrilla warfare, which I do not want, and which I will not take part in. The best way is for the Commission to fulfil its initiative-taking role by presenting substantial, bold and high quality proposals, and for you yourselves – as you have done, incidentally – to be able to work with us in this spirit. We have made proposals on this, and it is here, I believe, that we will truly be able to test our commitment to a stronger Europe. Some people provided results of opinion polls measuring support for or confidence in the European institutions. It is true that there are difficulties – serious difficulties – to which we should respond. However, if you had made a more complete analysis, you would have noticed that, while confidence in the European institutions sometimes poses problems, there is sometimes a much greater problem, which is confidence in national politicians and national governments, and the truth is that no one has mentioned this. We are currently experiencing an extremely difficult time from an economical and social point of view, and this is a time when everyone must show responsibility. We know well that, at difficult economic times, the tendency is for public opinion to have little confidence in political institutions, either at national or European level. I believe that the best way of responding to these worries is with results and with proposals. In essence, I believe that we are in agreement – at least, the pro-European majority in the European Parliament is. We are in favour of consolidating financial regulation. We have clearly declared that we will not abdicate the Commission’s right of initiative. We also want the banks and the financial institutions to contribute to solving the problem that they helped to create. That is why we are in favour of taxing financial activity. We want proposals for growth in Europe. This is what we will work towards. Some of you mentioned a problem which, incidentally, will be discussed this afternoon during a parliamentary sitting: the issue of the Roma. I will not go into detail on this issue now, as it will be discussed this afternoon. Let me say to you, however, that the Commission has been interested in this problem for a long time."@en1
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

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph