Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2004-11-17-Speech-3-060"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20041117.3.3-060"6
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
".
Mr President, during the debate it was said that to talk about there being no alternative to the Lisbon Strategy was questionable, but that reflects an incorrect perception of what it is really about. It is not a simple and easy fix that drew us to defining this position in Lisbon, it is a more complex and broadly defined strategy. It is not an
list, available for selective political shopping, but one balanced menu. Of course it is complex, and that is why we needed to re-evaluate where we are and how we can improve performance. If we did not have it at all, we would have to invent it.
On the issue of the readmission problem I would also say that confidence-building is necessary. It is not just about telling our neighbours and some developing countries far away from here that they have to take back refused asylum seekers from their own country or maybe their neighbouring country. We have to consider Europe's image in this. We have to offer some burden-sharing when we do these things. We must make it clear that we should not fund these activities with money earmarked for development cooperation. We have to talk about additionality, because we are adding to the list of things to do.
This is the last time I will address this House. I want, on a personal note, to thank you for five very good years, both on the level of the results we have achieved together and on a personal level.
Thank you, and good luck.
One aspect links the challenge of the ageing population in Europe with the challenge of increasing competitiveness. In a broad sense, that aspect is education. In my view, we are not entitled to life-long earning without life-long learning and this has to be very broadly defined. It is not just about elevating the elite in Europe, it is also important to look at the broader definition of education for the labour market. Here, the challenge for Europe to improve its competitiveness is not to say 'work harder' but to say 'work smarter'. This is the only way forward and is also why increasing the focus on education is essential.
Money is also essential. One per cent is not enough! It does not make sense to talk about ambition and to define and identify with the ambition of Lisbon without doing something to the budget. This is not just about the Community budget, but it does include it. We cannot have a credible ambition for Europe without a credible budget for Europe.
Mr Titley suggested a scoreboard to show the performance of Member States' implementation efforts. I see the Kok report as an initial step along those lines. I am totally convinced that President Barroso and the incoming Commission will do its utmost in this respect.
Mr Harbour mentioned the need for the Commission to reduce red tape and to simplify procedures. An important point on the European agenda should be to look again at the existing
of directives and find out whether they could be simplified by transforming them and clarifying things to have more regulations and fewer directives. This would make it easier for economic players in Europe to find out what the existing legal situation is by reading it in a regulation instead of having to find out how directives have been implemented in all the different Member States.
To mention just one example, the Prodi Commission has reduced the different ways of tendering from 48 to 8. This is not the answer to all the problems and I would say that the Financial Regulation is still a monster. We have not reached the point of simplification that we had hoped for. One reason for this is that in reacting to the problems of the previous Commission, we perhaps added too many layers of futile
controls. I hope the Commission and Parliament will continue to look at the Financial Regulation. Confidence-building between our European institutions is necessary, but it is now necessary to build self-confidence. We can do better.
Let me turn now to some final remarks on external relations. I add my voice to the sympathy being expressed to the family of the aid worker, Margaret Hassan, particularly because we in the Commission have been funding her work and the work of her organisation in Iraq over many years.
It seems to be perpetually necessary to remind the strongest power in the world about the need to respect international humanitarian law. I was totally shocked to learn the other day that Red Crescent aid workers were not given access to Fallujah by the United States Army there. This is very, very bad and the international community – if we have one – should react very strongly against this type of behaviour. We, as Europeans, cannot create a credible basis for our relationship with an emerging democratic Iraq if we do not invest and do not clarify that it is possible for our views to differ from those of others on some points."@en4
|
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, during the debate it was said that to talk about there being no alternative to the Lisbon Strategy was questionable, but that reflects an incorrect perception of what it is really about. It is not a simple and easy fix that drew us to defining this position in Lisbon, it is a more complex and broadly defined strategy. It is not an
list, available for selective political shopping, but one balanced menu. Of course it is complex, and that is why we needed to re-evaluate where we are and how we can improve performance. If we did not have it at all, we would have to invent it.
On the issue of the readmission problem I would also say that confidence-building is necessary. It is not just about telling our neighbours and some developing countries far away from here that they have to take back refused asylum seekers from their own country or maybe their neighbouring country. We have to consider Europe's image in this. We have to offer some burden-sharing when we do these things. We must make it clear that we should not fund these activities with money earmarked for development cooperation. We have to talk about additionality, because we are adding to the list of things to do.
This is the last time I will address this House. I want, on a personal note, to thank you for five very good years, both on the level of the results we have achieved together and on a personal level.
Thank you, and good luck.
One aspect links the challenge of the ageing population in Europe with the challenge of increasing competitiveness. In a broad sense, that aspect is education. In my view, we are not entitled to life-long earning without life-long learning and this has to be very broadly defined. It is not just about elevating the elite in Europe, it is also important to look at the broader definition of education for the labour market. Here, the challenge for Europe to improve its competitiveness is not to say 'work harder' but to say 'work smarter'. This is the only way forward and is also why increasing the focus on education is essential.
Money is also essential. One per cent is not enough! It does not make sense to talk about ambition and to define and identify with the ambition of Lisbon without doing something to the budget. This is not just about the Community budget, but it does include it. We cannot have a credible ambition for Europe without a credible budget for Europe.
Mr Titley suggested a scoreboard to show the performance of Member States' implementation efforts. I see the Kok report as an initial step along those lines. I am totally convinced that President Barroso and the incoming Commission will do its utmost in this respect.
Mr Harbour mentioned the need for the Commission to reduce red tape and to simplify procedures. An important point on the European agenda should be to look again at the existing
of directives and find out whether they could be simplified by transforming them and clarifying things to have more regulations and fewer directives. This would make it easier for economic players in Europe to find out what the existing legal situation is by reading it in a regulation instead of having to find out how directives have been implemented in all the different Member States.
To mention just one example, the Prodi Commission has reduced the different ways of tendering from 48 to 8. This is not the answer to all the problems and I would say that the Financial Regulation is still a monster. We have not reached the point of simplification that we had hoped for. One reason for this is that in reacting to the problems of the previous Commission, we perhaps added too many layers of futile
controls. I hope the Commission and Parliament will continue to look at the Financial Regulation. Confidence-building between our European institutions is necessary, but it is now necessary to build self-confidence. We can do better.
Let me turn now to some final remarks on external relations. I add my voice to the sympathy being expressed to the family of the aid worker, Margaret Hassan, particularly because we in the Commission have been funding her work and the work of her organisation in Iraq over many years.
It seems to be perpetually necessary to remind the strongest power in the world about the need to respect international humanitarian law. I was totally shocked to learn the other day that Red Crescent aid workers were not given access to Fallujah by the United States Army there. This is very, very bad and the international community – if we have one – should react very strongly against this type of behaviour. We, as Europeans, cannot create a credible basis for our relationship with an emerging democratic Iraq if we do not invest and do not clarify that it is possible for our views to differ from those of others on some points."@cs1
"Hr. formand, under forhandlingen blev det sagt, at det ikke var sikkert, at der ikke er noget alternativ til Lissabon-strategien, men at det afspejler en forkert opfattelse af, hvad det egentlig handler om. Det er ikke en simpel og enkel proces, der fik os til at definere denne holdning i Lissabon. Det er en meget mere kompliceret og bredt defineret strategi. Det er ikke nogen a la carte-menu for selektiv politisk udvælgelse, men en samlet menu. Selvfølgelig er den kompliceret, og derfor havde vi brug for at revurdere, hvor vi befinder os, og hvordan vi kan forbedre vores resultater. Hvis vi ikke havde den, var vi nødt til at opfinde den.
Hvad angår problemet med tilbagesendelse, vil jeg også gerne sige, at vi skal skabe tillid. Det handler ikke kun om at fortælle vores nabolande og visse udviklingslande langt væk, at de skal tage imod tilbagesendte asylansøgere fra deres eget land eller måske deres naboland. Her må vi tænke på Europas image. Vi må og skal tilbyde at dele byrden, når vi gør sådan noget. Vi skal gøre det klart, at vi ikke finansierer sådanne aktiviteter med penge, der er øremærket til udviklingssamarbejde. Vi er nødt til at tale om additionalitet, fordi vi tilføjer ting til listen over opgaver, der skal udføres.
Dette er sidste gang, jeg taler her i Parlamentet. Jeg vil hermed takke Dem for fem meget gode år både med hensyn til de resultater, vi har opnået sammen, og på det personlige plan.
Mange tak og held og lykke.
Et aspekt forbinder udfordringen ved befolkningens aldring i Europa med udfordringen ved øget konkurrenceevne. Dette aspekt er uddannelse i bred forstand. Efter min mening er vi ikke berettiget til livslang indtægt uden livslang læring, og det skal defineres meget bredt. Det handler ikke kun om at fremhæve eliten i Europa, det er også vigtigt at betragte den bredere definition af uddannelse til arbejdsmarkedet. Udfordringen i Europa med henblik på øget konkurrenceevne er her ikke at sige "arbejd mere", men at sige "arbejd mere effektivt". Det er den eneste vej frem, og det er også grunden til, at det er afgørende at øge fokus på uddannelse.
Penge spiller også en afgørende rolle. 1 % er ikke nok! Det giver ingen mening at tale om ambitioner og definere og identificere sig med Lissabon-strategiens ambitioner uden at gøre noget ved budgettet. Dette handler ikke kun om fællesskabsbudgettet, men det omfatter fællesskabsbudgettet. Vi kan ikke have en troværdig ambition for Europa uden et troværdigt budget for Europa.
Hr. Titley foreslog en resultattavle, der viser medlemsstaternes gennemførelsesindsats. Jeg betragter redegørelsen fra Wim Kok som et indledende skridt i den retning. Jeg er helt overbevist om, at kommissionsformand Barroso og den tiltrædende Kommission vil gøre deres absolut bedste i denne henseende.
Hr. Harbour nævnte, at der er behov for, at Kommissionen begrænser bureaukratiet og forenkler procedurerne. Et vigtigt punkt på den europæiske dagsorden bør være at undersøge den eksisterende
af direktiver og finde ud af, om de kan forenkles gennem omstrukturering og tydeliggørelse, så der bliver flere forordninger og færre direktiver. Det vil gøre det nemmere for de økonomiske aktører i Europa at hitte rede i den eksisterende lovgivning ved at læse i en forordning frem for at skulle undersøge, hvordan direktiver er gennemført i alle de forskellige medlemsstater.
For nu at nævne bare et eksempel har Prodi-Kommissionen reduceret antallet af udbudsmetoder fra 48 til 8. Det løser ikke alle problemer, og jeg mener, at finansforordningen stadig er noget af en moppedreng. Vi er ikke nået så langt med forenklingen, som vi havde håbet. Det skyldes bl.a., at vi måske indførte for mange lag af unyttig
kontrol som reaktion på den tidligere Kommissions problemer. Jeg håber, at Kommissionen og Parlamentet stadig vil se på finansforordningen. Det er nødvendigt at skabe tillid mellem de europæiske institutioner, og nu er det også nødvendigt at skabe selvtillid. Det kan vi gøre bedre.
Nu har jeg et par afsluttende bemærkninger til de eksterne forbindelser. Jeg vil også gerne udtrykke min sympati til hjælpearbejderen Margaret Hassans famillie, specielt fordi vi i Kommissionen i mange år har finansieret hendes og hendes organisations arbejde i Irak.
Det er åbenbart nødvendigt hele tiden at minde verdens stærkeste magt om at respektere folkeretten på det humanitære område. Jeg blev meget chokeret forleden dag, da jeg fandt ud af, at den amerikanske hær i Fallujah havde nægtet Røde Halvmånes hjælpearbejdere adgang til byen. Det er meget, meget slemt, og det internationale samfund - hvis vi har sådan et - bør reagere meget skarpt på en sådan adfærd. Som europæere kan vi ikke skabe et troværdigt grundlag for vores forbindelser med et demokratisk Irak, hvis vi ikke investerer og ikke får afklaret, at vores synspunkter godt kan være forskellige fra andres i nogle henseender."@da2
".
Herr Präsident, in der Aussprache wurde gesagt, die Feststellung, es gebe keine Alternative zur Lissabonner Strategie, sei fragwürdig. Diese Äußerung aber zeigt, dass nicht richtig verstanden wurde, worum es wirklich geht. Wir hatten keine einfache und leichte Lösung zur Hand, die uns veranlasste, in Lissabon diese Position einzunehmen, vielmehr handelt es sich um eine umfassende und breit angelegte Strategie. Sie ist keine Tageskarte, nach der man seine politischen Einkäufe zusammenstellen kann, sondern ein ausgewogenes Menü. Natürlich handelt es sich um eine komplizierte Angelegenheit, und deshalb müssen wir neu bestimmen, wo wir uns befinden und wie wir unsere Leistungen verbessern können. Wenn wir die Strategie nicht hätten, müssten wir sie erfinden.
Zur Frage der Rückübernahme möchte ich bemerken, dass auch hier Vertrauensbildung notwendig ist. Es geht nicht nur darum, unseren Nachbarn und einigen Entwicklungsländern, die weitab gelegen sind, zu erklären, dass sie abgelehnte Asylbewerber, die aus ihrem Land oder vielleicht auch aus einem Nachbarland stammen, zurücknehmen müssen. Hier geht es auch um das Ansehen Europas. Wir müssen einen gewissen Lastenausgleich anbieten, wenn wir das tun. Wir müssen klarstellen, dass wir diese Aktivitäten nicht mit dem Geld bezahlen, das für die Entwicklungszusammenarbeit vorgesehen ist. Wir müssen über Additionalität sprechen, weil etwas zu der Liste der Dinge hinzu kommt, die wir erledigen müssen.
Damit habe ich zum letzten Mal hier im Parlament gesprochen. Wenn ich noch eine persönliche Anmerkung machen darf, dann diese, dass ich Ihnen für fünf sehr gute Jahre danke, und zwar sowohl was die gemeinsam erreichten Ergebnisse betrifft als auch privat.
Danke und alles Gute.
Die Herausforderung, die die alternde Bevölkerung in Europa darstellt, und die Herausforderung, die Wettbewerbsfähigkeit zu verbessern, werden durch einen gemeinsamen Aspekt verknüpft, und dieser lautet, fasst man ihnen in breitem Sinne, Bildung. Meiner Meinung nach haben wir ohne lebenslanges Lernen keinen Anspruch auf Einkommen ein Leben lang, und das muss in einem sehr breiten Sinne definiert werden. Hier geht es nicht darum, die Elite in Europa besonders zu fördern, sondern darum, Bildung für den Arbeitsmarkt breiter zu definieren. Die Herausforderung für Europa, seine Wettbewerbsfähigkeit zu erhöhen, bedeutet nicht zu sagen „arbeite härter“, sondern zu sagen „arbeite klüger“. Nur auf diese Weise kommen wir voran, und deshalb ist es auch so wichtig, die Bildung stärker ins Blickfeld zu rücken.
Auch Geld ist wichtig. Ein Prozent reicht nicht! Es macht keinen Sinn, von Ambitionen zu sprechen und mit den Ambitionen von Lissabon etwas festzulegen, ohne am Haushalt etwas zu verändern. Hier geht es nicht nur um den Gemeinschaftshaushalt, schließt ihn aber ein. Es gibt keine glaubhaften Ambitionen für Europa ohne einen glaubhaften Haushalt für Europa.
Herr Titley hat einen Anzeiger vorgeschlagen, aus dem hervorgeht, wo die Mitgliedstaaten bei der Umsetzung stehen. Ich betrachte den Bericht Kok als einen ersten Schritt in diese Richtung. Es ist meine volle Überzeugung, dass Präsident Barroso und die neue Kommission in dieser Hinsicht alles in ihren Kräften Stehende tun werden.
Herr Harbour wies auf die Notwendigkeit hin, dass die Kommission die Bürokratie abbaut und die Verfahren vereinfacht. Ein wichtiger Punkt auf der Tagesordnung Europas sollte sein, dass wir uns noch einmal mit dem Bestand von Richtlinien befassen und prüfen, ob sie durch Umwandlung vereinfacht werden können und ob wir zu der Festlegung gelangen, die Zahl der Richtlinien zugunsten einer erhöhten Zahl von Verordnungen zu verringern. Dann nämlich wäre es für die Wirtschaftsakteure in Europa einfacher, die Rechtslage zu erkennen, bräuchten sie dazu doch nur die Verordnung zu lesen, anstatt herausfinden zu müssen, wie die Richtlinien in den einzelnen Mitgliedstaaten in einzelstaatliches Recht umgesetzt wurden.
Lassen Sie mich nur ein Beispiel nennen: Die Prodi-Kommission hat die Ausschreibungs-Möglichkeiten von 48 auf 8 reduziert. Doch damit sind noch nicht alle Probleme gelöst, und für meinen Geschmack ist die Haushaltsordnung noch immer ein Monstrum. Wir haben die erhoffte Vereinfachung keinesfalls erreicht. Ein Grund besteht darin, dass wir in dem Bemühen, auf die Probleme der vorherigen Kommission zu reagieren, vielleicht zu viele unnütze Ex-ante-Kontrollen eingeführt haben. Ich hoffe, dass sich Kommission und Parlament weiter mit der Haushaltsordnung befassen werden. Die Vertrauensbildung zwischen unseren europäischen Organen ist notwendig, doch jetzt müssen wir Selbstvertrauen aufbauen. Wir können es doch besser machen!
Gestatten Sie mir abschließend, noch einige Bemerkungen zu den Außenbeziehungen zu machen. Ich schließe mich dem Beileid an, das der Familie von Margaret Hassan, die als humanitäre Helferin tätig war, ausgesprochen wurde, insbesondere da wir als Kommission ihre Arbeit und die Arbeit ihrer Organisation im Irak über viele Jahre finanziell unterstützt haben.
Es scheint immer wieder angebracht zu sein, die stärkste Macht der Welt an die Notwendigkeit zu erinnern, das humanitäre Völkerrecht zu achten. Ich war völlig schockiert, als ich vor einigen Tagen erfuhr, dass die US-Armee Mitarbeitern des Roten Halbmonds den Zutritt zu Falludscha verweigert haben. Das ist wirklich schlimm, und die internationale Gemeinschaft - sofern es die gibt - sollte scharf auf ein solches Verhalten reagieren. Wir können als Europäer keine glaubwürdige Basis für unsere Beziehungen zu einem sich entwickelnden demokratischen Irak schaffen, wenn wir uns nicht engagieren und nicht klarstellen, dass in einigen Fragen unsere Ansichten von denen anderer abweichen können."@de9
"Κύριε Πρόεδρε, κατά τη διάρκεια της συζήτησης ειπώθηκε ότι αμφισβητείται το γεγονός ότι δεν υπάρχει άλλη εναλλακτική λύση από τη στρατηγική της Λισαβόνας· αυτό όμως αντικατοπτρίζει μια εσφαλμένη αντίληψη του πραγματικού περιεχομένου αυτής της στρατηγικής. Δεν ήταν απλό και εύκολο να καταλήξουμε σε αυτή τη στάση στη Λισαβόνα, πρόκειται για μια πιο πολύπλοκη και ευρύτερη στρατηγική. Δεν είναι ένας κατάλογος “α λα καρτ”, από τον οποίο κάθε πολιτικός επιλέγει αυτό που θέλει, αλλά ένα ισορροπημένο μενού. Φυσικά και είναι πολύπλοκο, και γι’ αυτόν τον λόγο έπρεπε να αξιολογήσουμε ξανά το πού είμαστε και το πώς μπορούμε να βελτιώσουμε τις επιδόσεις. Εάν δεν είχαμε καθόλου τη στρατηγική αυτή, θα έπρεπε να την εφεύρουμε.
Σχετικά με το πρόβλημα της επανεισδοχής, θέλω να πω ότι είναι αναγκαία η ανάπτυξη εμπιστοσύνης. Δεν αρκεί να ζητήσουμε από τους γείτονές μας και από ορισμένες μακρινές αναπτυσσόμενες χώρες να δεχτούν πίσω τους υπηκόους τους ή τους υπηκόους των γειτονικών τους χωρών που ζήτησαν άσυλο στην ΕΕ και η αίτησή τους απορρίφθηκε. Πρέπει να εξετάσουμε τι εικόνα θα σχηματίσουν για την Ευρώπη σε αυτή την περίπτωση. Πρέπει να προσφέρουμε κάποια κατανομή των βαρών σε αυτές τις περιπτώσεις. Πρέπει να καταστήσουμε σαφές ότι δεν θα χρηματοδοτούμε αυτές τις δραστηριότητες με χρήματα που έχουν δεσμευτεί για την αναπτυξιακή συνεργασία. Πρέπει να κάνουμε λόγο για προσθετικότητα, διότι προσθέτουμε στον κατάλογο των όσων πρέπει να γίνουν.
Αυτή είναι η τελευταία φορά που μιλώ στην αίθουσα αυτή. Θα ήθελα να σας ευχαριστήσω για τα πέντε πολύ καλά τελευταία χρόνια, τόσο σε επίπεδο αποτελεσμάτων που επιτύχαμε από κοινού όσο και σε προσωπικό επίπεδο.
Σας ευχαριστώ και σας εύχομαι καλή τύχη στο έργο σας.
Μία πτυχή συνδέει την πρόκληση της γήρανσης του πληθυσμού στην Ευρώπη με την πρόκληση της αύξησης της ανταγωνιστικότητας. Με την ευρύτερη έννοια, αυτή η πτυχή είναι η εκπαίδευση. Κατά την άποψή μου, δεν δικαιούμαστε διά βίου εισοδήματα χωρίς διά βίου μάθηση, και αυτό θα πρέπει να οριστεί ευρύτερα. Δεν πρόκειται μόνο για την ανάδειξη της αφρόκρεμας στην Ευρώπη, είναι σημαντικό να εξετάσουμε επίσης τον ευρύτερο ορισμό της εκπαίδευσης για την αγορά εργασίας. Για να βελτιώσει η Ευρώπη την ανταγωνιστικότητά της δεν χρειάζεται περισσότερη εργασία αλλά εξυπνότερη εργασία. Μόνο έτσι θα σημειώσουμε πρόοδο και γι’ αυτό είναι σημαντικό να δώσουμε μεγαλύτερη έμφαση στην εκπαίδευση.
Τα χρήματα είναι επίσης σημαντικά. Το ένα τοις εκατό δεν αρκεί! Δεν έχει νόημα να συζητούμε για φιλοδοξίες και να ορίζουμε και να αναγνωρίζουμε τις φιλοδοξίες της Λισαβόνας χωρίς να τροποποιούμε τον προϋπολογισμό. Αυτό δεν αφορά μόνο τον κοινοτικό προϋπολογισμό, αλλά τον περιλαμβάνει. Δεν μπορούμε να έχουμε μια αξιόπιστη φιλοδοξία για την Ευρώπη χωρίς έναν αξιόπιστο ευρωπαϊκό προϋπολογισμό.
Ο κ. Titley πρότεινε έναν πίνακα αποτελεσμάτων για να ελέγχονται οι επιδόσεις των κρατών μελών στον τομέα της εφαρμογής των αποφάσεων που λαμβάνονται σε κοινοτικό επίπεδο. Θεωρώ την έκθεση Kok ως ένα πρώτο βήμα προς αυτή την κατεύθυνση. Είμαι απολύτως πεπεισμένος ότι ο Πρόεδρος Barroso και η νέα Επιτροπή θα κάνουν ό,τι καλύτερο μπορούν ως προς αυτό.
Ο κ. Harbour ανέφερε ότι η Επιτροπή πρέπει να μειώσει τη γραφειοκρατία και να απλοποιήσει τις διαδικασίες. Ένα σημαντικό στοιχείο του ευρωπαϊκού προγράμματος θα πρέπει να είναι η επανεξέταση του ισχύοντος κεκτημένου, όσον αφορά τις οδηγίες, ώστε να δούμε εάν μπορούν να απλουστευτούν με κάποιες μετατροπές και να είναι όλα σαφέστερα με περισσότερους κανονισμούς και λιγότερες οδηγίες. Έτσι θα είναι ευκολότερο για τους οικονομικούς παράγοντες στην Ευρώπη να μαθαίνουν ποια είναι η υφιστάμενη νομική κατάσταση διαβάζοντάς την σε έναν κανονισμό αντί να ψάχνουν πώς εφαρμόστηκαν οι οδηγίες σε κάθε κράτος μέλος ξεχωριστά.
Θα σας αναφέρω ένα μόνο παράδειγμα. Η Επιτροπή του κ. Πρόντι μείωσε τους διάφορους τρόπους πρόσκλησης υποβολής προσφορών από 48 σε 8. Αυτό δεν συνιστά απάντηση για όλα τα προβλήματα. Θα έλεγα μάλιστα ότι ο δημοσιονομικός κανονισμός εξακολουθεί να είναι ένα τέρας. Δεν έχουμε καταφέρει να τον απλουστεύσουμε στον βαθμό που θέλαμε. Ένας λόγος γι’ αυτό είναι ότι, αντιδρώντας στα προβλήματα της προηγούμενης Επιτροπής, προσθέσαμε ίσως υπερβολικά πολλούς και περιττούς εκ των προτέρων ελέγχους. Ελπίζω η Επιτροπή και το Κοινοβούλιο να συνεχίσουν να ασχολούνται με τον δημοσιονομικό κανονισμό. Η καλλιέργεια εμπιστοσύνης μεταξύ των ευρωπαϊκών θεσμικών οργάνων είναι αναγκαία, αυτό όμως που επείγει τώρα είναι να αποκτήσουμε αυτοπεποίθηση. Μπορούμε και καλύτερα.
Επιτρέψτε μου τώρα να διατυπώσω ορισμένες τελικές παρατηρήσεις για τις εξωτερικές σχέσεις. Θα ήθελα να εκφράσω τα θερμά μου συλλυπητήρια στην οικογένεια της αδικοχαμένης Margaret Hassan. Η Επιτροπή χρηματοδοτούσε το έργο της και το έργο της οργάνωσής της στο Ιράκ εδώ και πολλά χρόνια.
Είναι μάλλον διαρκώς αναγκαίο να υπενθυμίζουμε στη μεγαλύτερη δύναμη του κόσμου την ανάγκη να σέβεται το διεθνές ανθρωπιστικό δίκαιο. Μου προκάλεσε ιδιαίτερη κατάπληξη το γεγονός που πληροφορήθηκα τις προάλλες: ότι ο στρατός των ΗΠΑ δεν επέτρεψε την πρόσβαση στη Φαλούτζα σε εργαζόμενους στην Ερυθρά Ημισέληνο. Αυτό είναι πολύ άσχημο και η διεθνής κοινότητα –εάν υπάρχει– πρέπει να αντιδράσει πολύ έντονα σε αυτού του είδους τις συμπεριφορές. Εμείς, ως Ευρωπαίοι, δεν μπορούμε να δημιουργήσουμε μια αξιόπιστη βάση για καλλιέργεια στενότερων σχέσεων με το αναδυόμενο δημοκρατικό Ιράκ εάν δεν επενδύσουμε σε αυτό και αν δεν αποσαφηνίσουμε ότι είναι δυνατό οι απόψεις μας να διαφέρουν από τις απόψεις άλλων σε ορισμένα θέματα."@el10
".
Señor Presidente, durante el debate se ha dicho que es cuestionable hablar de que no hay alternativas a la Estrategia de Lisboa, pero esto refleja una percepción errónea de lo que realmente hay detrás de todo esto. No fue una situación sencilla y fácil la que nos permitió definir esta posición en Lisboa. Es una estrategia más compleja y ampliamente definida. No es un catálogo que permita efectuar compras políticas selectivas, sino un menú equilibrado. Por supuesto que es complicado, y por ese motivo teníamos que evaluar de nuevo dónde estamos y cómo podemos mejorar los logros. Si no lo tuviéramos, tendríamos que inventarlo.
En cuanto al problema de la readmisión, yo diría también que es necesario crear confianza. No se trata solo de decir a nuestros vecinos y a algunos países en desarrollo más lejanos que tienen que volver a aceptar a aquellos ciudadanos suyos o de un país vecino a quienes se les ha denegado el asilo. Debemos tener en cuenta la imagen de Europa. Debemos ofrecernos a compartir la carga cuando hagamos cosas así. Hemos de dejar claro que no deberíamos financiar dichas actividades con dinero reservado para la cooperación al desarrollo. Debemos hablar de complementariedad, porque lo que hacemos es completar la lista de cosas que hay que hacer.
Es la última vez que me dirijo a esta Cámara. A título personal, quiero darles las gracias por esos cinco años magníficos, tanto en relación con los resultados que juntos hemos conseguido como en el aspecto personal.
Gracias y buena suerte.
Hay un aspecto que relaciona el reto del envejecimiento de la población europea con el reto de una mayor competitividad. En sentido amplio, este aspecto es la educación. En mi opinión, no tenemos derecho a una renta vitalicia si no aprendemos durante toda la vida, y esta afirmación tiene que definirse en sentido muy amplio. No se trata solo de mejorar la elite de Europa, también es importante tener en cuenta la definición más amplia de educación para el mercado de trabajo. Por lo tanto, la solución para mejorar la competitividad de Europa no es decir «hay que trabajar más duramente» sino «hay que trabajar de forma más inteligente». Es la única manera de avanzar y es también el motivo por el que es esencial centrarnos más en la educación.
También el dinero es esencial. ¡No basta con un uno por ciento! Es absurdo hablar de ambiciones y definir la ambición de Lisboa e identificarse con ella sin tocar el presupuesto. No se trata solo del presupuesto de la Comunidad, pero este también está incluido. No podemos tener una ambición creíble para Europa sin un presupuesto creíble para Europa.
El señor Titley ha sugerido un cuadro de indicadores que muestre los resultados de los esfuerzos de implementación de los Estados miembros. Creo que el informe Kok es un primer paso en este sentido. Estoy absolutamente convencido de que el Presidente Barroso y la Comisión entrante harán todo lo que puedan al respecto.
El señor Harbour ha mencionado la necesidad de que la Comisión reduzca los trámites burocráticos y simplifique los procedimientos. Un punto importante de la agenda europea debería consistir en volver a revisar el acervo existente de directivas y averiguar si se podrían simplificar transformándolas y aclarando las cosas para conseguir más reglamentos y menos directivas. De esa forma sería más fácil que los agentes económicos de Europa averiguaran cuál es la situación jurídica actual leyéndolo en un reglamento en vez de tener que averiguar cómo se han aplicado las directivas en cada uno de los diversos Estados miembros.
Para poner un ejemplo, la Comisión Prodi ha reducido las diversas formas de licitación de 48 a 8. No es la respuesta a todos los problemas y yo diría que el Reglamento Financiero sigue siendo un monstruo. No hemos llegado al punto de simplificación que habíamos esperado. Uno de los motivos es que para reaccionar ante los problemas de la Comisión anterior, quizás hemos añadido demasiados controles inútiles
. Espero que la Comisión y el Parlamento sigan revisando el Reglamento Financiero. Es necesario crear confianza entre las diversas instituciones europeas, pero hoy por hoy es imperativo que confiemos en nosotros mismos. Podemos hacerlo mejor.
Permítanme ahora formular algunas observaciones finales sobre las relaciones exteriores. Quiero unirme a la expresión de nuestras condolencias a la familia de la cooperante Margaret Hassan, en especial porque durante muchos años la Comisión ha financiado su trabajo y el trabajo de su organización en Iraq.
Parece que no cesa la necesidad de recordar a la superpotencia mundial que es imperativo respetar el derecho humanitario internacional. Me afectó muchísimo leer el otro día que el ejército de los Estados Unidos no permitía a la Media Luna Roja y sus colaboradores entrar en Faluya. Eso está muy, pero que muy mal, y la comunidad internacional –si es que existe– debería responder con suma firmeza a este tipo de conductas. Nosotros, los europeos, no podemos crear una base creíble para nuestra relación con un Iraq emergente y democrático si no invertimos y no dejamos claro que nuestros puntos de vista pueden diferir de los de los demás en determinados aspectos."@es20
"Mr President, during the debate it was said that to talk about there being no alternative to the Lisbon Strategy was questionable, but that reflects an incorrect perception of what it is really about. It is not a simple and easy fix that drew us to defining this position in Lisbon, it is a more complex and broadly defined strategy. It is not an
list, available for selective political shopping, but one balanced menu. Of course it is complex, and that is why we needed to re-evaluate where we are and how we can improve performance. If we did not have it at all, we would have to invent it.
On the issue of the readmission problem I would also say that confidence-building is necessary. It is not just about telling our neighbours and some developing countries far away from here that they have to take back refused asylum seekers from their own country or maybe their neighbouring country. We have to consider Europe's image in this. We have to offer some burden-sharing when we do these things. We must make it clear that we should not fund these activities with money earmarked for development cooperation. We have to talk about additionality, because we are adding to the list of things to do.
This is the last time I will address this House. I want, on a personal note, to thank you for five very good years, both on the level of the results we have achieved together and on a personal level.
Thank you, and good luck.
One aspect links the challenge of the ageing population in Europe with the challenge of increasing competitiveness. In a broad sense, that aspect is education. In my view, we are not entitled to life-long earning without life-long learning and this has to be very broadly defined. It is not just about elevating the elite in Europe, it is also important to look at the broader definition of education for the labour market. Here, the challenge for Europe to improve its competitiveness is not to say 'work harder' but to say 'work smarter'. This is the only way forward and is also why increasing the focus on education is essential.
Money is also essential. One per cent is not enough! It does not make sense to talk about ambition and to define and identify with the ambition of Lisbon without doing something to the budget. This is not just about the Community budget, but it does include it. We cannot have a credible ambition for Europe without a credible budget for Europe.
Mr Titley suggested a scoreboard to show the performance of Member States' implementation efforts. I see the Kok report as an initial step along those lines. I am totally convinced that President Barroso and the incoming Commission will do its utmost in this respect.
Mr Harbour mentioned the need for the Commission to reduce red tape and to simplify procedures. An important point on the European agenda should be to look again at the existing
of directives and find out whether they could be simplified by transforming them and clarifying things to have more regulations and fewer directives. This would make it easier for economic players in Europe to find out what the existing legal situation is by reading it in a regulation instead of having to find out how directives have been implemented in all the different Member States.
To mention just one example, the Prodi Commission has reduced the different ways of tendering from 48 to 8. This is not the answer to all the problems and I would say that the Financial Regulation is still a monster. We have not reached the point of simplification that we had hoped for. One reason for this is that in reacting to the problems of the previous Commission, we perhaps added too many layers of futile
controls. I hope the Commission and Parliament will continue to look at the Financial Regulation. Confidence-building between our European institutions is necessary, but it is now necessary to build self-confidence. We can do better.
Let me turn now to some final remarks on external relations. I add my voice to the sympathy being expressed to the family of the aid worker, Margaret Hassan, particularly because we in the Commission have been funding her work and the work of her organisation in Iraq over many years.
It seems to be perpetually necessary to remind the strongest power in the world about the need to respect international humanitarian law. I was totally shocked to learn the other day that Red Crescent aid workers were not given access to Fallujah by the United States Army there. This is very, very bad and the international community – if we have one – should react very strongly against this type of behaviour. We, as Europeans, cannot create a credible basis for our relationship with an emerging democratic Iraq if we do not invest and do not clarify that it is possible for our views to differ from those of others on some points."@et5
".
Arvoisa puhemies, keskustelun aikana todettiin, että puheet siitä, ettei Lissabonin strategialle ole vaihtoehtoa, olivat kyseenalaisia, mutta tämä ilmentää väärää käsitystä siitä, mistä strategiassa on tosiasiassa kyse. Meitä ei Lissabonissa ohjannut määrittelemään tätä kantaa mikään yksinkertainen ja helppo etukäteissovinto, vaan kyseessä on monimutkaisempi ja pääpiirteissään määritelty strategia. Se ei ole
luettelo, josta voidaan kulloinkin valita poliittisesti sopivat vaihtoehdot, vaan tasapainoinen valikoima. Tietenkin se on monimutkainen, ja tästä syystä meidän oli arvioitava uudelleen, missä olemme ja miten voimme parantaa tuloksia. Jos meillä ei olisi strategiaa ollenkaan, meidän olisi keksittävä se.
Takaisinoton ongelmasta sanoisin niin ikään, että luottamuksen rakentaminen on tarpeen. Kyse ei ole ainoastaan siitä, että naapureillemme ja joillekin kaukaisille kehitysmaille ilmoitetaan, että niiden on otettava takaisin kansalaisensa tai ehkäpä sellaiset niiden naapurimaiden kansalaiset, joilta turvapaikka on evätty. Meidän on pohdittava, millainen mielikuva Euroopasta syntyy. Näin tehdessämme meidän on kannettava jokin osuus taakasta. Meidän on tehtävä selväksi, ettei meidän pitäisi rahoittaa tätä toimintaa kehitysyhteistyöhön osoitetuin varoin. Meidän on puhuttava täydentävyydestä, koska täydennämme tehtäväluetteloa.
Tämä on viimeinen kerta, kun puhun tälle parlamentille. Haluan henkilökohtaisesti kiittää kuluneista viidestä vuodesta, jotka ovat olleet erittäin hyvät niin yhdessä saavuttamiemme tulosten kannalta kuin henkilökohtaisestikin.
Kiitoksia ja onnea.
Yksi näkökohta liittää Euroopan ikääntyvän väestön haasteen kilpailukyvyn parantamisen haasteeseen. Laajassa merkityksessä tämä näkökohta on koulutus. Nähdäkseni meillä ei ole oikeutta elinikäiseen ansaitsemiseen ilman elinikäistä oppimista, joka on määriteltävä hyvin laajasti. Kyse ei ole ainoastaan Euroopan eliitin korottamisesta, vaan tärkeää on myös tarkastella työmarkkinoiden hyödyksi koituvan koulutuksen laajempaa määritelmää. Euroopan kilpailukyvyn parantamisen haaste ei tarkoita sitä, että olisi "työskenneltävä lujemmin" vaan että on "työskenneltävä älykkäämmin". Tämä on ainoa tie eteenpäin, ja tästä syystä on myös tärkeää kohdistaa huomio suuremmassa määrin koulutukseen.
Raha on myös tärkeää. Yksi prosentti ei ole tarpeeksi! On järjetöntä puhua kunnianhimoisista tavoitteista, määritellä Lissabonin kunnianhimoiset tavoitteet ja samastua niihin tekemättä mitään talousarviolle. Tässä ei ole kyse vain yhteisön talousarviosta, vaikka se sisältyykin varoihin. Euroopalle ei voida asettaa uskottavasti kunnianhimoisia tavoitteita, ellei sillä ole uskottavaa talousarviota.
Jäsen Titley ehdotti tulostaulua, josta kävisivät ilmi jäsenvaltioiden täytäntöönpanotoimista saadut tulokset. Nähdäkseni Kokin raportti on alkuvaiheen toimenpide tähän suuntaan. Olen täysin vakuuttunut siitä, että puheenjohtaja Barroso ja tuleva komissio tekevät tältä osin parhaansa.
Jäsen Harbour totesi, että komission pitäisi karsia byrokratiaa ja yksinkertaistaa menettelyitä. Tärkeä näkökohta Euroopan asialistalla olisi tarkastella uudelleen direktiiveistä koostuvaa unionin säännöstöä ja selvittää, voitaisiinko niitä yksinkertaistaa muuntamalla niitä ja selkeyttää tilannetta lisäämällä asetuksia ja vähentämällä direktiivejä. Näin Euroopan elinkeinonharjoittajien olisi helpompaa päästä perille kulloisestakin oikeustilasta tarkistamalla se asetuksesta sen sijaan, että niiden pitäisi selvittää, miten direktiivi on kaikissa eri jäsenvaltioissa pantu täytäntöön.
Vain yhden esimerkin mainitakseni Prodin komissio on supistanut erilaiset tarjouskilpailumenettelyt 48:sta 8:aan. Tällä ei ratkaista kaikkia ongelmia, ja mielestäni varainhoitoasetus on edelleen hirviö. Emme ole päässeet yksinkertaistamisessa toivomiimme tavoitteisiin. Yksi syy tähän on se, että reagoidessamme aiemman komission ongelmiin lisäsimme asetukseen kenties liian monta turhaa varainhoidon ennakkotarkastusten tasoa. Toivon, että komissio ja parlamentti jatkavat varainhoitoasetuksen tarkastelua. Luottamuksen rakentaminen Euroopan toimielimiemme välillä on tarpeen, mutta nyt tarpeen on rakentaa itseluottamusta. Pystymme parempaan.
Esitän seuraavaksi muutaman loppuhuomautuksen ulkosuhteista. Ilmaisen muiden tavoin myötätuntoni avustustyöntekijä Margaret Hassanin omaisille ennen kaikkea siksi, että me komissiossa olemme rahoittaneet monien vuosien ajan hänen ja hänen organisaationsa toimintaa Irakissa.
Näyttää siltä, että maailman mahtavimmalle vallalle on jatkuvasti muistutettava tarpeesta noudattaa kansainvälistä humanitaarista oikeutta. Olin syvästi järkyttynyt saadessani kuulla jokin aika sitten, ettei Yhdysvaltojen armeija ollut päästänyt Punaisen Puolikuun avustustyöntekijöitä Fallujaan. Tämä on erittäin valitettavaa, ja kansainvälisen yhteisön – jos sellaista on – olisi tuomittava tällainen menettely äärimmäisen painokkaasti. Me eurooppalaisina emme voi laskea uskottavaa perustaa suhteillemme kehittyvän demokraattisen Irakin kanssa, jos emme investoi emmekä tee selväksi sitä, että joissakin kohdin meillä voi olla muista poikkeavia näkemyksiä."@fi7
".
Monsieur le Président, au cours du débat, il a été dit qu’il est discutable de parler d’absence d’alternatives à la stratégie de Lisbonne. Mais une telle pensée reflète une perception erronée de ce dont il s’agit en réalité. Ce n’est pas un arrangement simple et facile qui nous a amené à définir cette position à Lisbonne, mais une stratégie plus complexe et étendue. Il ne s’agit pas d’une liste à la carte, disponible pour effectuer un shopping politique sélectif, mais d’un menu équilibré. Bien sûr cette stratégie est complexe, et c’est la raison pour laquelle nous avions besoin de réévaluer à quel stade nous sommes arrivés et la façon dont nous pouvons améliorer nos performances. Si elle n’existait pas, nous devrions l’inventer.
Pour ce qui est du problème du rapatriement, je voudrais également mentionner que l’établissement d’une relation de confiance est nécessaire. Il ne s’agit pas uniquement de dire à nos voisins et certains pays en voie de développement situés loin de chez nous de reprendre les demandeurs d’asile déboutés originaires de leur propre pays, voire de leur pays voisin. Dans ce domaine, nous devons penser à l’image de l’Europe. Nous devons proposer un partage des charges lorsque nous agissons de cette manière. Il doit être bien établi que nous ne devrions pas financer ces activités avec de l’argent destiné à la coopération au développement. Nous devons parler en termes d’additionnalité, car il s’agit d’un ajout à la liste des choses que nous devons faire.
C’est la dernière fois que je m’adresse à cette Assemblée. Je voudrais personnellement vous remercier pour ces cinq années excellentes, tant sur le plan des résultats auxquels nous sommes parvenus ensemble que d’un point de vue personnel.
Merci, et bonne chance.
L’un des aspects lie le défi que constitue le vieillissement de la population européenne avec le défi d’intensification de la compétitivité. Dans un sens large, cet aspect est l’éducation. De mon point de vue, nous ne sommes pas habilités à gagner de l’argent tout au long de notre vie si nous n’apprenons pas tout au long de notre vie. Et cette idée doit faire l’objet d’une définition très large. Il ne s’agit pas uniquement d’élever l’élite en Europe; il est également important de considérer la définition élargie de l’éducation pour le marché de l’emploi. Dans le cas présent, le défi auquel doit faire face l’Europe si elle veut améliorer sa compétitivité ne revient pas à dire «travaillez plus dur», mais «travaillez plus intelligemment». C’est la seule manière de progresser et c’est également la raison pour laquelle il est essentiel de se concentrer davantage sur l’éducation.
L’argent constitue également un facteur vital. Un pour cent n’est pas suffisant! Il est absurde de parler d’ambition, de définir l’ambition de Lisbonne et de s’y identifier sans modifier le budget. Il ne s’agit pas uniquement du budget communautaire, mais celui-ci en fait néanmoins partie. Nous ne pouvons nourrir une ambition crédible pour l’Europe sans un budget crédible pour cette Europe.
M. Titley a suggéré l’établissement d’un tableau montrant les résultats découlant des efforts de mise en œuvre déployés par les États membres. Je considère le rapport Kok comme une première étape dans cette direction. Je suis totalement convaincu que le président Barroso et la nouvelle Commission feront tout leur possible à cet égard.
M. Harbour a mentionné la nécessité pour la Commission de réduire les charges administratives et de simplifier les procédures. Un autre point important à faire figurer à l’ordre du jour européen serait de passer à nouveau en revue l’acquis existant de directives et de voir s’il est possible de les simplifier en les transformant et en clarifiant les choses pour parvenir à plus de règlements et moins de directives. Une telle mesure permettrait aux acteurs économiques européens de se renseigner plus facilement sur la situation juridique actuelle en se référant à un règlement; ils ne seraient pas obligés de chercher comment les directives ont été transposées dans tous les États membres.
Pour mentionner un seul exemple, la Commission Prodi a réduit de 48 à 8 le nombre de procédures d’appel d’offres. Ce n’est pas la panacée et je dirais que le règlement financier est toujours un monstre. Nous n’avons pas atteint la simplification que nous avions espéré. Ce résultat décevant est dû en partie au fait qu’en réagissant aux problèmes de la Commission précédente, nous avons peut-être ajouté trop de couches de contrôles
inutiles. J’espère que la Commission et le Parlement continueront à se pencher sur le règlement financier. Il est nécessaire d’établir une relation de confiance entre les institutions européennes, mais il est également nécessaire aujourd’hui de cultiver la confiance en soi. Nous sommes capables de mieux.
Je voudrais maintenant aborder quelques remarques finales concernant les relations extérieures. Je joins ma voix aux condoléances exprimées à la famille de Margaret Hassan, membre d’une association humanitaire, tout particulièrement parce que nous, membres de la Commission, avons financé son travail et celui de son organisation en Irak pendant de nombreuses années.
Il semble constamment nécessaire de rappeler à la plus grande puissance du monde la nécessité de respecter le droit humanitaire international. J’ai été totalement choqué d’apprendre l’autre jour que l’armée américaine postée à Falloujah avait refusé de laisser entrer les membres du Croissant-Rouge dans la ville. C’est très, très grave et la communauté internationale - si elle existe - devrait réagir très fermement contre ce type de comportement. En tant qu’Européens, nous ne pouvons pas créer le fondement crédible d’une relation avec un Irak à l’état de démocratie naissante si nous n’investissons pas et ne faisons pas clairement savoir que nos opinions peuvent différer de celles des autres sur certains points."@fr8
"Mr President, during the debate it was said that to talk about there being no alternative to the Lisbon Strategy was questionable, but that reflects an incorrect perception of what it is really about. It is not a simple and easy fix that drew us to defining this position in Lisbon, it is a more complex and broadly defined strategy. It is not an
list, available for selective political shopping, but one balanced menu. Of course it is complex, and that is why we needed to re-evaluate where we are and how we can improve performance. If we did not have it at all, we would have to invent it.
On the issue of the readmission problem I would also say that confidence-building is necessary. It is not just about telling our neighbours and some developing countries far away from here that they have to take back refused asylum seekers from their own country or maybe their neighbouring country. We have to consider Europe's image in this. We have to offer some burden-sharing when we do these things. We must make it clear that we should not fund these activities with money earmarked for development cooperation. We have to talk about additionality, because we are adding to the list of things to do.
This is the last time I will address this House. I want, on a personal note, to thank you for five very good years, both on the level of the results we have achieved together and on a personal level.
Thank you, and good luck.
One aspect links the challenge of the ageing population in Europe with the challenge of increasing competitiveness. In a broad sense, that aspect is education. In my view, we are not entitled to life-long earning without life-long learning and this has to be very broadly defined. It is not just about elevating the elite in Europe, it is also important to look at the broader definition of education for the labour market. Here, the challenge for Europe to improve its competitiveness is not to say 'work harder' but to say 'work smarter'. This is the only way forward and is also why increasing the focus on education is essential.
Money is also essential. One per cent is not enough! It does not make sense to talk about ambition and to define and identify with the ambition of Lisbon without doing something to the budget. This is not just about the Community budget, but it does include it. We cannot have a credible ambition for Europe without a credible budget for Europe.
Mr Titley suggested a scoreboard to show the performance of Member States' implementation efforts. I see the Kok report as an initial step along those lines. I am totally convinced that President Barroso and the incoming Commission will do its utmost in this respect.
Mr Harbour mentioned the need for the Commission to reduce red tape and to simplify procedures. An important point on the European agenda should be to look again at the existing
of directives and find out whether they could be simplified by transforming them and clarifying things to have more regulations and fewer directives. This would make it easier for economic players in Europe to find out what the existing legal situation is by reading it in a regulation instead of having to find out how directives have been implemented in all the different Member States.
To mention just one example, the Prodi Commission has reduced the different ways of tendering from 48 to 8. This is not the answer to all the problems and I would say that the Financial Regulation is still a monster. We have not reached the point of simplification that we had hoped for. One reason for this is that in reacting to the problems of the previous Commission, we perhaps added too many layers of futile
controls. I hope the Commission and Parliament will continue to look at the Financial Regulation. Confidence-building between our European institutions is necessary, but it is now necessary to build self-confidence. We can do better.
Let me turn now to some final remarks on external relations. I add my voice to the sympathy being expressed to the family of the aid worker, Margaret Hassan, particularly because we in the Commission have been funding her work and the work of her organisation in Iraq over many years.
It seems to be perpetually necessary to remind the strongest power in the world about the need to respect international humanitarian law. I was totally shocked to learn the other day that Red Crescent aid workers were not given access to Fallujah by the United States Army there. This is very, very bad and the international community – if we have one – should react very strongly against this type of behaviour. We, as Europeans, cannot create a credible basis for our relationship with an emerging democratic Iraq if we do not invest and do not clarify that it is possible for our views to differ from those of others on some points."@hu11
"Signor Presidente, durante la discussione è stato detto che l’affermazione secondo cui non vi sarebbero alternative alla strategia di Lisbona è discutibile, ma riflette una percezione scorretta della realtà dei fatti. Non è per trovare una soluzione semplice e facile che abbiamo stabilito questa posizione a Lisbona, si tratta di una strategia più complessa e ampiamente definita. Non è un menù
su cui possiamo fare le scelte politiche che più ci interessano, ma è un menù equilibrato. Chiaramente è una strategia complessa e per questa ragione abbiamo dovuto rivalutare a che punto siamo e come possiamo migliorarne il rendimento. Se non ci fosse, dovremmo inventarla.
Anche riguardo al problema della riammissione direi che è necessario migliorare la fiducia. Non si tratta solo di imporre ai nostri paesi vicini e a qualche paese in via di sviluppo lontano da noi di riammettere i cittadini ai quali è stato rifiutato l’asilo politico in provenienza dal paese in questione o magari da un paese vicino. Dobbiamo considerare l’immagine dell’Europa che ne deriverà. Dobbiamo offrire una condivisione dell’onere nell’intraprendere simili iniziative. Dobbiamo affermare chiaramente che non dovremmo finanziare queste attività con risorse stanziate per la cooperazione allo sviluppo. Dobbiamo parlare di addizionalità, perché stiamo allungando l’elenco delle cose da fare.
Questa è l’ultima volta che parlo alla vostra Assemblea. Desidero ringraziarvi anche a titolo personale per i cinque anni molto positivi in termini di risultati conseguiti insieme.
Grazie e auguri per il futuro.
C’è un aspetto che collega la sfida dell’invecchiamento demografico in Europa con la sfida dell’aumento della competitività. In senso ampio, tale aspetto è l’istruzione. A mio parere, non abbiamo diritto a un reddito che copra l’intero arco della vita senza l’apprendimento durante l’intero arco della vita e questo aspetto deve essere ampiamente definito. Non si tratta solo di elevare l’
in Europa, è anche importante guardare alla definizione più ampia di istruzione per il mercato del lavoro. Qui, la sfida per l’Europa di migliorare la sua competitività non è dire “lavorate di più”, ma dire “lavorate in modo più intelligente”. Questa è l’unica via su cui procedere ed è anche la ragione per cui è essenziale concentrarsi maggiormente sull’istruzione.
Anche le risorse economiche sono essenziali. L’uno per cento non è sufficiente! Non ha senso parlare di ambizione e illustrare e sostenere gli obiettivi di Lisbona senza agire anche sul bilancio. Non si tratta solo del bilancio comunitario, ma anche di questo. Non possiamo nutrire un’ambizione credibile per l’Europa senza un bilancio europeo altrettanto credibile.
L’onorevole Titley ha proposto un documento che illustri i risultati degli Stati membri in materia di attuazione. Considero la relazione Kok un passo iniziale lungo tali linee. Sono del tutto convinto che il Presidente Barroso e la Commissione entrante faranno il massimo al riguardo.
L’onorevole Harbour ha menzionato la necessità che la Commissione riduca la burocrazia e semplifichi le procedure. Un importante punto sull’agenda europea dovrebbe essere il riesame dell’
costituito da direttive e il vaglio di eventuali possibilità di semplificazioni, trasformazioni e chiarimenti, al fine di avere più regolamenti e meno direttive. Tale snellimento permetterebbe agli operatori economici europei di capire più agevolmente la situazione giuridica esistente leggendo un regolamento invece di dover andare a cercare le modalità di attuazione delle direttive in tutti i diversi Stati membri.
Per fare solo un esempio, la Commissione Prodi ha ridotto da 48 a 8 le diverse modalità delle gare d’appalto. Non si tratta della soluzione a tutti i problemi e direi che il regolamento finanziario rimane tuttora un mostro. Non siamo giunti al livello di semplificazione che avevamo sperato, forse perché, volendo reagire ai problemi emersi con la Commissione precedente, abbiamo finito con l’aggiungere troppi livelli di inutili controlli
Spero che la Commissione e il Parlamento continuino a esaminare il regolamento finanziario. Migliorare la fiducia tra le Istituzioni europee è necessario, ma ora è indispensabile aumentare la fiducia in se stessi. Possiamo fare meglio.
Vorrei ora concludere con qualche osservazione sulle relazioni esterne. Mi unisco alle condoglianze espresse alla famiglia della volontaria Margaret Hassan, in particolare perché la Commissione finanzia da molti anni il suo lavoro e il lavoro della sua organizzazione in Iraq.
Sembra essere sempre necessario ricordare alla maggiore potenza mondiale la necessità di rispettare il diritto umanitario internazionale. Sono rimasto profondamente scioccato nell’apprendere l’altro giorno che l’esercito degli Stati Uniti ivi presente non ha autorizzato l’accesso a Falluja di alcuni volontari della Mezzaluna Rossa. Si tratta di un atto estremamente negativo e la comunità internazionale – se esiste – dovrebbe stigmatizzare con molta decisione un simile comportamento. Noi, come europei, non possiamo creare una base credibile per le nostre relazioni con il nascente Iraq democratico, se non investiamo in esso e non affermiamo la nostra possibilità di dissentire dai pareri di altri su determinati punti."@it12
"Mr President, during the debate it was said that to talk about there being no alternative to the Lisbon Strategy was questionable, but that reflects an incorrect perception of what it is really about. It is not a simple and easy fix that drew us to defining this position in Lisbon, it is a more complex and broadly defined strategy. It is not an
list, available for selective political shopping, but one balanced menu. Of course it is complex, and that is why we needed to re-evaluate where we are and how we can improve performance. If we did not have it at all, we would have to invent it.
On the issue of the readmission problem I would also say that confidence-building is necessary. It is not just about telling our neighbours and some developing countries far away from here that they have to take back refused asylum seekers from their own country or maybe their neighbouring country. We have to consider Europe's image in this. We have to offer some burden-sharing when we do these things. We must make it clear that we should not fund these activities with money earmarked for development cooperation. We have to talk about additionality, because we are adding to the list of things to do.
This is the last time I will address this House. I want, on a personal note, to thank you for five very good years, both on the level of the results we have achieved together and on a personal level.
Thank you, and good luck.
One aspect links the challenge of the ageing population in Europe with the challenge of increasing competitiveness. In a broad sense, that aspect is education. In my view, we are not entitled to life-long earning without life-long learning and this has to be very broadly defined. It is not just about elevating the elite in Europe, it is also important to look at the broader definition of education for the labour market. Here, the challenge for Europe to improve its competitiveness is not to say 'work harder' but to say 'work smarter'. This is the only way forward and is also why increasing the focus on education is essential.
Money is also essential. One per cent is not enough! It does not make sense to talk about ambition and to define and identify with the ambition of Lisbon without doing something to the budget. This is not just about the Community budget, but it does include it. We cannot have a credible ambition for Europe without a credible budget for Europe.
Mr Titley suggested a scoreboard to show the performance of Member States' implementation efforts. I see the Kok report as an initial step along those lines. I am totally convinced that President Barroso and the incoming Commission will do its utmost in this respect.
Mr Harbour mentioned the need for the Commission to reduce red tape and to simplify procedures. An important point on the European agenda should be to look again at the existing
of directives and find out whether they could be simplified by transforming them and clarifying things to have more regulations and fewer directives. This would make it easier for economic players in Europe to find out what the existing legal situation is by reading it in a regulation instead of having to find out how directives have been implemented in all the different Member States.
To mention just one example, the Prodi Commission has reduced the different ways of tendering from 48 to 8. This is not the answer to all the problems and I would say that the Financial Regulation is still a monster. We have not reached the point of simplification that we had hoped for. One reason for this is that in reacting to the problems of the previous Commission, we perhaps added too many layers of futile
controls. I hope the Commission and Parliament will continue to look at the Financial Regulation. Confidence-building between our European institutions is necessary, but it is now necessary to build self-confidence. We can do better.
Let me turn now to some final remarks on external relations. I add my voice to the sympathy being expressed to the family of the aid worker, Margaret Hassan, particularly because we in the Commission have been funding her work and the work of her organisation in Iraq over many years.
It seems to be perpetually necessary to remind the strongest power in the world about the need to respect international humanitarian law. I was totally shocked to learn the other day that Red Crescent aid workers were not given access to Fallujah by the United States Army there. This is very, very bad and the international community – if we have one – should react very strongly against this type of behaviour. We, as Europeans, cannot create a credible basis for our relationship with an emerging democratic Iraq if we do not invest and do not clarify that it is possible for our views to differ from those of others on some points."@lt14
"Mr President, during the debate it was said that to talk about there being no alternative to the Lisbon Strategy was questionable, but that reflects an incorrect perception of what it is really about. It is not a simple and easy fix that drew us to defining this position in Lisbon, it is a more complex and broadly defined strategy. It is not an
list, available for selective political shopping, but one balanced menu. Of course it is complex, and that is why we needed to re-evaluate where we are and how we can improve performance. If we did not have it at all, we would have to invent it.
On the issue of the readmission problem I would also say that confidence-building is necessary. It is not just about telling our neighbours and some developing countries far away from here that they have to take back refused asylum seekers from their own country or maybe their neighbouring country. We have to consider Europe's image in this. We have to offer some burden-sharing when we do these things. We must make it clear that we should not fund these activities with money earmarked for development cooperation. We have to talk about additionality, because we are adding to the list of things to do.
This is the last time I will address this House. I want, on a personal note, to thank you for five very good years, both on the level of the results we have achieved together and on a personal level.
Thank you, and good luck.
One aspect links the challenge of the ageing population in Europe with the challenge of increasing competitiveness. In a broad sense, that aspect is education. In my view, we are not entitled to life-long earning without life-long learning and this has to be very broadly defined. It is not just about elevating the elite in Europe, it is also important to look at the broader definition of education for the labour market. Here, the challenge for Europe to improve its competitiveness is not to say 'work harder' but to say 'work smarter'. This is the only way forward and is also why increasing the focus on education is essential.
Money is also essential. One per cent is not enough! It does not make sense to talk about ambition and to define and identify with the ambition of Lisbon without doing something to the budget. This is not just about the Community budget, but it does include it. We cannot have a credible ambition for Europe without a credible budget for Europe.
Mr Titley suggested a scoreboard to show the performance of Member States' implementation efforts. I see the Kok report as an initial step along those lines. I am totally convinced that President Barroso and the incoming Commission will do its utmost in this respect.
Mr Harbour mentioned the need for the Commission to reduce red tape and to simplify procedures. An important point on the European agenda should be to look again at the existing
of directives and find out whether they could be simplified by transforming them and clarifying things to have more regulations and fewer directives. This would make it easier for economic players in Europe to find out what the existing legal situation is by reading it in a regulation instead of having to find out how directives have been implemented in all the different Member States.
To mention just one example, the Prodi Commission has reduced the different ways of tendering from 48 to 8. This is not the answer to all the problems and I would say that the Financial Regulation is still a monster. We have not reached the point of simplification that we had hoped for. One reason for this is that in reacting to the problems of the previous Commission, we perhaps added too many layers of futile
controls. I hope the Commission and Parliament will continue to look at the Financial Regulation. Confidence-building between our European institutions is necessary, but it is now necessary to build self-confidence. We can do better.
Let me turn now to some final remarks on external relations. I add my voice to the sympathy being expressed to the family of the aid worker, Margaret Hassan, particularly because we in the Commission have been funding her work and the work of her organisation in Iraq over many years.
It seems to be perpetually necessary to remind the strongest power in the world about the need to respect international humanitarian law. I was totally shocked to learn the other day that Red Crescent aid workers were not given access to Fallujah by the United States Army there. This is very, very bad and the international community – if we have one – should react very strongly against this type of behaviour. We, as Europeans, cannot create a credible basis for our relationship with an emerging democratic Iraq if we do not invest and do not clarify that it is possible for our views to differ from those of others on some points."@lv13
"Mr President, during the debate it was said that to talk about there being no alternative to the Lisbon Strategy was questionable, but that reflects an incorrect perception of what it is really about. It is not a simple and easy fix that drew us to defining this position in Lisbon, it is a more complex and broadly defined strategy. It is not an
list, available for selective political shopping, but one balanced menu. Of course it is complex, and that is why we needed to re-evaluate where we are and how we can improve performance. If we did not have it at all, we would have to invent it.
On the issue of the readmission problem I would also say that confidence-building is necessary. It is not just about telling our neighbours and some developing countries far away from here that they have to take back refused asylum seekers from their own country or maybe their neighbouring country. We have to consider Europe's image in this. We have to offer some burden-sharing when we do these things. We must make it clear that we should not fund these activities with money earmarked for development cooperation. We have to talk about additionality, because we are adding to the list of things to do.
This is the last time I will address this House. I want, on a personal note, to thank you for five very good years, both on the level of the results we have achieved together and on a personal level.
Thank you, and good luck.
One aspect links the challenge of the ageing population in Europe with the challenge of increasing competitiveness. In a broad sense, that aspect is education. In my view, we are not entitled to life-long earning without life-long learning and this has to be very broadly defined. It is not just about elevating the elite in Europe, it is also important to look at the broader definition of education for the labour market. Here, the challenge for Europe to improve its competitiveness is not to say 'work harder' but to say 'work smarter'. This is the only way forward and is also why increasing the focus on education is essential.
Money is also essential. One per cent is not enough! It does not make sense to talk about ambition and to define and identify with the ambition of Lisbon without doing something to the budget. This is not just about the Community budget, but it does include it. We cannot have a credible ambition for Europe without a credible budget for Europe.
Mr Titley suggested a scoreboard to show the performance of Member States' implementation efforts. I see the Kok report as an initial step along those lines. I am totally convinced that President Barroso and the incoming Commission will do its utmost in this respect.
Mr Harbour mentioned the need for the Commission to reduce red tape and to simplify procedures. An important point on the European agenda should be to look again at the existing
of directives and find out whether they could be simplified by transforming them and clarifying things to have more regulations and fewer directives. This would make it easier for economic players in Europe to find out what the existing legal situation is by reading it in a regulation instead of having to find out how directives have been implemented in all the different Member States.
To mention just one example, the Prodi Commission has reduced the different ways of tendering from 48 to 8. This is not the answer to all the problems and I would say that the Financial Regulation is still a monster. We have not reached the point of simplification that we had hoped for. One reason for this is that in reacting to the problems of the previous Commission, we perhaps added too many layers of futile
controls. I hope the Commission and Parliament will continue to look at the Financial Regulation. Confidence-building between our European institutions is necessary, but it is now necessary to build self-confidence. We can do better.
Let me turn now to some final remarks on external relations. I add my voice to the sympathy being expressed to the family of the aid worker, Margaret Hassan, particularly because we in the Commission have been funding her work and the work of her organisation in Iraq over many years.
It seems to be perpetually necessary to remind the strongest power in the world about the need to respect international humanitarian law. I was totally shocked to learn the other day that Red Crescent aid workers were not given access to Fallujah by the United States Army there. This is very, very bad and the international community – if we have one – should react very strongly against this type of behaviour. We, as Europeans, cannot create a credible basis for our relationship with an emerging democratic Iraq if we do not invest and do not clarify that it is possible for our views to differ from those of others on some points."@mt15
"Mijnheer de Voorzitter, tijdens het debat zijn er vraagtekens geplaatst bij de opmerking dat er voor de Lissabon-strategie geen alternatief is, maar ik denk dat men dan toch niet goed begrepen heeft waar het uiteindelijk om gaat. Wat in Lissabon besloten is, was niet bedoeld als een snelle, eenvoudige oplossing; het is een meer complexe, alomvattende strategie. Geen lijst met beleidsoplossingen
waaruit naar believen een keuze gemaakt kan worden, maar één enkel uitgebalanceerd menu. Het is uiteraard een ingewikkelde materie, en deze herziening is nodig om te bekijken hoe het ermee staat en wat we moeten doen om betere resultaten te behalen. Maar zouden we deze strategie niet hebben, dan zouden we haar nu toch moeten bedenken.
Wat de kwestie van het terugnemen van vluchtelingen betreft zou ik willen zeggen dat het ook op dit punt van belang is vertrouwen op te bouwen. Het gaat er niet alleen om onze buren en de leiders van een aantal ontwikkelingslanden ver weg duidelijk te maken dat ze afgewezen asielzoekers die afkomstig zijn uit hun land of uit een van hun buurlanden terug moeten nemen; we moeten hierbij ook rekening houden met het imago van Europa. Als we dit soort dingen doen, moeten we ook bereid zijn een deel van de lasten op ons te nemen. Het kan niet zo zijn dat we dit soort activiteiten financieren met middelen die voor ontwikkelingshulp bestemd zijn. We zullen het over aanvullende middelen moeten hebben, want het gaat hier om zaken die nieuw zijn op ons programma.
Vandaag spreek ik voor het laatst dit Parlement toe. Ik zou graag met een persoonlijke noot willen eindigen en u willen bedanken voor vijf uitstekende jaren – uitstekend als we kijken naar hetgeen we samen hebben bereikt, en uitstekend wat de persoonlijke verhoudingen betreft.
Hartelijk dank. Alle goeds voor u allen.
Eén aspect betreft de vraag naar de samenhang tussen het probleem van de vergrijzing in Europa en de noodzaak het concurrentievermogen te versterken. Centraal element daarbij is onderwijs, in de meest ruime betekenis van het woord. Mijns inziens kunnen we niet spreken over levenslang verdienen zonder te spreken over levenslang leren, en dat laatste moeten we zo breed mogelijk zien. Het gaat niet alleen om het verheffen van de elite in Europa, maar ook, in meer algemene zin, om het opleiden van mensen voor de arbeidsmarkt. Wil Europa een sterkere concurrentiepositie verwerven, dan moeten we ons niet richten op 'harder werken' maar op 'slimmer werken'. Dat is de enige manier om vooruit te komen, en daarom is het zo belangrijk dat we meer aandacht besteden aan onderwijs en opleiding.
Geld is natuurlijk ook van groot belang. Eén procent is echt niet genoeg. Het heeft weinig zin over ambities te praten en doelstellingen zoals die van Lissabon vast te leggen en te onderschrijven zonder iets aan de begroting te doen. Het gaat hier weliswaar niet alleen om de Gemeenschapsbegroting, maar die hoort er wel bij. We kunnen niet geloofwaardig zijn in onze ambities voor Europa als we daarvoor geen geloofwaardige Europese begroting beschikbaar stellen.
De heer Titley kwam met de suggestie een scoreboard in te voeren om inzicht te krijgen in de prestaties van de lidstaten bij de uitvoering van de strategie. Ik zie het verslag-Kok als een eerste stap in deze richting, en ik twijfel er niet aan dat voorzitter Barroso en de aantredende Commissie wat dit betreft hun uiterste best zullen doen.
De heer Harbour wees erop dat de Commissie de veelheid van regels en voorschriften moet terugdringen en de procedures moet vereenvoudigen. Een belangrijk punt op de Europese agenda moet inderdaad zijn het acquis van richtlijnen eens door te lichten en te bekijken of er niet het een en ander vereenvoudigd en verduidelijkt kan worden door richtlijnen om te zetten in verordeningen. Meer verordeningen dus, en minder richtlijnen; de economische actoren in Europa willen immers graag weten aan welke wettelijke regels ze moeten voldoen, en het is voor hen gemakkelijker als ze dat in een verordening kunnen lezen dan dat ze moeten achterhalen hoe allerlei richtlijnen zijn omgezet in de verschillende lidstaten.
Ik zal u een voorbeeld geven. De Commissie-Prodi heeft het aantal aanbestedingsprocedures teruggebracht van 48 tot 8. Dat is natuurlijk niet het antwoord op alle problemen; het Financieel Reglement is wat mij betreft nog steeds een gedrocht. De mate van vereenvoudiging die we ons gewenst hadden, hebben we nog niet bereikt. Dit komt onder andere doordat we in onze ijver de problemen van de vorige Commissie aan te pakken, misschien te veel lagen met futiele ex ante controles hebben ingevoerd. Ik hoop dat de Commissie en het Parlement kritisch zullen blijven kijken naar het Financieel Reglement. Vertrouwen opbouwen tussen onze Europese instellingen is nodig, maar we moeten nu ook zelfvertrouwen opbouwen. Het kan allemaal een stuk beter.
Ik zou ter afsluiting nog wat opmerkingen willen maken over de externe betrekkingen. Ik sluit me aan bij degenen die hun solidariteit hebben betuigd aan de familie van hulpverleenster Margaret Hassan, met name ook omdat de Commissie haar werk en het werk van haar organisatie in Irak al vele jaren financieel ondersteunt.
Verder lijkt het noodzakelijk te zijn de sterkste mogendheid ter wereld er steeds opnieuw aan te herinneren dat het internationaal humanitair recht geëerbiedigd dient te worden. Het bericht van onlangs dat medewerkers van de Rode Halve Maan de toegang tot Falluja geweigerd is door het Amerikaanse leger ter plekke heeft me echt verbijsterd. Dat is een buitengewoon slechte zaak, en de internationale gemeenschap, voorzover die bestaat, zou zeer krachtig stelling moeten nemen tegen een dergelijke houding. Wij Europeanen kunnen geen geloofwaardige basis creëren voor onze betrekkingen met een ontluikend democratisch Irak als we ons niet inspannen om duidelijk te maken dat onze visie op bepaalde punten kan afwijken van die van anderen."@nl3
"Mr President, during the debate it was said that to talk about there being no alternative to the Lisbon Strategy was questionable, but that reflects an incorrect perception of what it is really about. It is not a simple and easy fix that drew us to defining this position in Lisbon, it is a more complex and broadly defined strategy. It is not an
list, available for selective political shopping, but one balanced menu. Of course it is complex, and that is why we needed to re-evaluate where we are and how we can improve performance. If we did not have it at all, we would have to invent it.
On the issue of the readmission problem I would also say that confidence-building is necessary. It is not just about telling our neighbours and some developing countries far away from here that they have to take back refused asylum seekers from their own country or maybe their neighbouring country. We have to consider Europe's image in this. We have to offer some burden-sharing when we do these things. We must make it clear that we should not fund these activities with money earmarked for development cooperation. We have to talk about additionality, because we are adding to the list of things to do.
This is the last time I will address this House. I want, on a personal note, to thank you for five very good years, both on the level of the results we have achieved together and on a personal level.
Thank you, and good luck.
One aspect links the challenge of the ageing population in Europe with the challenge of increasing competitiveness. In a broad sense, that aspect is education. In my view, we are not entitled to life-long earning without life-long learning and this has to be very broadly defined. It is not just about elevating the elite in Europe, it is also important to look at the broader definition of education for the labour market. Here, the challenge for Europe to improve its competitiveness is not to say 'work harder' but to say 'work smarter'. This is the only way forward and is also why increasing the focus on education is essential.
Money is also essential. One per cent is not enough! It does not make sense to talk about ambition and to define and identify with the ambition of Lisbon without doing something to the budget. This is not just about the Community budget, but it does include it. We cannot have a credible ambition for Europe without a credible budget for Europe.
Mr Titley suggested a scoreboard to show the performance of Member States' implementation efforts. I see the Kok report as an initial step along those lines. I am totally convinced that President Barroso and the incoming Commission will do its utmost in this respect.
Mr Harbour mentioned the need for the Commission to reduce red tape and to simplify procedures. An important point on the European agenda should be to look again at the existing
of directives and find out whether they could be simplified by transforming them and clarifying things to have more regulations and fewer directives. This would make it easier for economic players in Europe to find out what the existing legal situation is by reading it in a regulation instead of having to find out how directives have been implemented in all the different Member States.
To mention just one example, the Prodi Commission has reduced the different ways of tendering from 48 to 8. This is not the answer to all the problems and I would say that the Financial Regulation is still a monster. We have not reached the point of simplification that we had hoped for. One reason for this is that in reacting to the problems of the previous Commission, we perhaps added too many layers of futile
controls. I hope the Commission and Parliament will continue to look at the Financial Regulation. Confidence-building between our European institutions is necessary, but it is now necessary to build self-confidence. We can do better.
Let me turn now to some final remarks on external relations. I add my voice to the sympathy being expressed to the family of the aid worker, Margaret Hassan, particularly because we in the Commission have been funding her work and the work of her organisation in Iraq over many years.
It seems to be perpetually necessary to remind the strongest power in the world about the need to respect international humanitarian law. I was totally shocked to learn the other day that Red Crescent aid workers were not given access to Fallujah by the United States Army there. This is very, very bad and the international community – if we have one – should react very strongly against this type of behaviour. We, as Europeans, cannot create a credible basis for our relationship with an emerging democratic Iraq if we do not invest and do not clarify that it is possible for our views to differ from those of others on some points."@pl16
"Senhor Presidente, durante o debate houve quem afirmasse que era discutível dizer que não havia alternativa para a Estratégia de Lisboa, mas isso reflecte uma percepção incorrecta daquilo que está realmente em causa. Não foi um problemazito simples que nos levou a definir esta posição em Lisboa, trata-se de uma estratégia mais complexa e definida em termos mais vastos. Não se trata de uma lista
que se encontre disponível para compras selectivas de carácter político, mas de um menu equilibrado. É complexa, evidentemente, e foi por isso que precisámos de reavaliar a situação em que nos encontramos e a forma como podemos melhorar o nosso desempenho. Se não a tivéssemos, teríamos de a inventar.
No que se prende com a questão do problema da readmissão, diria também que é necessário gerar confiança. Não se trata apenas de dizer aos nossos vizinhos e a alguns longínquos países em desenvolvimento que têm de aceitar de volta requerentes de asilo oriundos do seu país ou talvez de um país seu vizinho, porque o pedido de asilo foi recusado. Temos de reflectir sobre a imagem da Europa neste contexto. Quando fazemos coisas como estas temos de oferecer uma certa repartição dos encargos. Temos de tornar claro que não deveremos financiar essas actividades com dinheiro que esteja destinado à cooperação para o desenvolvimento. Temos de falar de adicionalidade, porque estamos a aumentar a lista das coisas que há para fazer.
Esta é a minha última intervenção perante esta Assembleia. A título pessoal, desejo agradecer-vos cinco anos excelentes, tanto a nível dos resultados que alcançámos em conjunto como a nível pessoal.
Muito obrigado e boa sorte.
Há um aspecto que liga o desafio colocado pelo envelhecimento da população na Europa ao desafio da competitividade crescente. Em sentido lato, esse aspecto é a educação. A meu ver, não temos direito a receber remuneração ao longo da vida sem aprendizagem ao longo da vida e isto tem de ser definido em termos muito amplos. Não se trata apenas de elevar a elite na Europa, também é importante olhar para a definição mais ampla da educação para o mercado de trabalho. Aqui, o desafio que se coloca à Europa para melhorar a sua competitividade não é dizer "trabalhem mais", mas dizer "trabalhem de forma mais inteligente". Esta é a única maneira de avançar e é também por isso que é essencial fazer incidir uma maior atenção sobre a educação.
O dinheiro também é essencial. Um por cento não chega! Não faz sentido falar em ambição e definir a ambição de Lisboa e identificar-se com ela, sem fazer qualquer coisa relativamente ao orçamento. Não se trata apenas do orçamento comunitário, mas ele também está incluído, como é evidente. Não podemos ter uma ambição credível para a Europa sem um orçamento credível para a Europa.
O senhor deputado Titley sugeriu que houvesse um painel de avaliação para mostrar o desempenho dos Estados-Membros em termos de esforços de implementação. Vejo o relatório Kok como um primeiro passo nesse sentido. Estou plenamente convencido de que o Senhor Presidente Barroso e a nova Comissão farão tudo o que estiver ao seu alcance a esse respeito.
O senhor deputado Harbour referiu a necessidade de a Comissão reduzir a burocracia e simplificar processos. Um aspecto importante que consta da agenda europeia será o de examinar novamente o acervo de directivas já existente e ver se elas poderão ser simplificadas, transformando-as e clarificando as coisas para passarmos a ter mais regulamentos e menos directivas. Isto permitiria que os agentes económicos da Europa apurassem mais facilmente qual é a actual situação jurídica, lendo-a num regulamento, em vez de terem de descobrir como é que as directivas foram executadas em todos os diferentes Estados-Membros.
Refiro apenas um exemplo: a Comissão Prodi reduziu de 48 para 8 as diferentes formas de abertura de concursos. Esta não é a resposta para todos os problemas e diria mesmo que o Regulamento Financeiro continua a ser um monstro. Não atingimos o nível de simplificação que esperávamos. Um dos motivos para tal foi o facto de termos talvez aumentado excessivamente o número de controlos
que não servem para nada, como forma de reacção aos problemas levantados pela Comissão anterior. Espero que a Comissão e o Parlamento continuem a analisar o Regulamento Financeiro. É necessário gerar confiança entre as nossas Instituições europeias, mas o que é necessário agora é gerar auto-confiança. Podemos melhorar as coisas.
Permitam-me que faça agora algumas observações finais sobre relações externas. Junto a minha voz às condolências apresentadas à família de Margaret Hassan, colaboradora de uma organização de ajuda humanitária, em especial porque nós, na Comissão, há muitos anos que financiamos o seu trabalho e o trabalho da organização a que pertencia no Iraque.
Parece ser eternamente necessário recordar à potência mais forte do mundo a necessidade de respeitar o direito internacional humanitário. Fiquei absolutamente chocado quando soube, há dias, que os cooperantes do Crescente Vermelho não foram autorizados pelos militares do exército dos Estados Unidos a entrar em Fallujah. Isto é muito, muito mau e a comunidade internacional - se é que existe - devia reagir com muita firmeza contra este tipo de comportamento. Nós, Europeus, não podemos criar uma base credível para a nossa relação com um Iraque democrático emergente se não tornarmos claro e não investirmos no facto de que é possível que, em alguns aspectos, as nossas opiniões sejam diferentes das de outros."@pt17
"Mr President, during the debate it was said that to talk about there being no alternative to the Lisbon Strategy was questionable, but that reflects an incorrect perception of what it is really about. It is not a simple and easy fix that drew us to defining this position in Lisbon, it is a more complex and broadly defined strategy. It is not an
list, available for selective political shopping, but one balanced menu. Of course it is complex, and that is why we needed to re-evaluate where we are and how we can improve performance. If we did not have it at all, we would have to invent it.
On the issue of the readmission problem I would also say that confidence-building is necessary. It is not just about telling our neighbours and some developing countries far away from here that they have to take back refused asylum seekers from their own country or maybe their neighbouring country. We have to consider Europe's image in this. We have to offer some burden-sharing when we do these things. We must make it clear that we should not fund these activities with money earmarked for development cooperation. We have to talk about additionality, because we are adding to the list of things to do.
This is the last time I will address this House. I want, on a personal note, to thank you for five very good years, both on the level of the results we have achieved together and on a personal level.
Thank you, and good luck.
One aspect links the challenge of the ageing population in Europe with the challenge of increasing competitiveness. In a broad sense, that aspect is education. In my view, we are not entitled to life-long earning without life-long learning and this has to be very broadly defined. It is not just about elevating the elite in Europe, it is also important to look at the broader definition of education for the labour market. Here, the challenge for Europe to improve its competitiveness is not to say 'work harder' but to say 'work smarter'. This is the only way forward and is also why increasing the focus on education is essential.
Money is also essential. One per cent is not enough! It does not make sense to talk about ambition and to define and identify with the ambition of Lisbon without doing something to the budget. This is not just about the Community budget, but it does include it. We cannot have a credible ambition for Europe without a credible budget for Europe.
Mr Titley suggested a scoreboard to show the performance of Member States' implementation efforts. I see the Kok report as an initial step along those lines. I am totally convinced that President Barroso and the incoming Commission will do its utmost in this respect.
Mr Harbour mentioned the need for the Commission to reduce red tape and to simplify procedures. An important point on the European agenda should be to look again at the existing
of directives and find out whether they could be simplified by transforming them and clarifying things to have more regulations and fewer directives. This would make it easier for economic players in Europe to find out what the existing legal situation is by reading it in a regulation instead of having to find out how directives have been implemented in all the different Member States.
To mention just one example, the Prodi Commission has reduced the different ways of tendering from 48 to 8. This is not the answer to all the problems and I would say that the Financial Regulation is still a monster. We have not reached the point of simplification that we had hoped for. One reason for this is that in reacting to the problems of the previous Commission, we perhaps added too many layers of futile
controls. I hope the Commission and Parliament will continue to look at the Financial Regulation. Confidence-building between our European institutions is necessary, but it is now necessary to build self-confidence. We can do better.
Let me turn now to some final remarks on external relations. I add my voice to the sympathy being expressed to the family of the aid worker, Margaret Hassan, particularly because we in the Commission have been funding her work and the work of her organisation in Iraq over many years.
It seems to be perpetually necessary to remind the strongest power in the world about the need to respect international humanitarian law. I was totally shocked to learn the other day that Red Crescent aid workers were not given access to Fallujah by the United States Army there. This is very, very bad and the international community – if we have one – should react very strongly against this type of behaviour. We, as Europeans, cannot create a credible basis for our relationship with an emerging democratic Iraq if we do not invest and do not clarify that it is possible for our views to differ from those of others on some points."@sk18
"Mr President, during the debate it was said that to talk about there being no alternative to the Lisbon Strategy was questionable, but that reflects an incorrect perception of what it is really about. It is not a simple and easy fix that drew us to defining this position in Lisbon, it is a more complex and broadly defined strategy. It is not an
list, available for selective political shopping, but one balanced menu. Of course it is complex, and that is why we needed to re-evaluate where we are and how we can improve performance. If we did not have it at all, we would have to invent it.
On the issue of the readmission problem I would also say that confidence-building is necessary. It is not just about telling our neighbours and some developing countries far away from here that they have to take back refused asylum seekers from their own country or maybe their neighbouring country. We have to consider Europe's image in this. We have to offer some burden-sharing when we do these things. We must make it clear that we should not fund these activities with money earmarked for development cooperation. We have to talk about additionality, because we are adding to the list of things to do.
This is the last time I will address this House. I want, on a personal note, to thank you for five very good years, both on the level of the results we have achieved together and on a personal level.
Thank you, and good luck.
One aspect links the challenge of the ageing population in Europe with the challenge of increasing competitiveness. In a broad sense, that aspect is education. In my view, we are not entitled to life-long earning without life-long learning and this has to be very broadly defined. It is not just about elevating the elite in Europe, it is also important to look at the broader definition of education for the labour market. Here, the challenge for Europe to improve its competitiveness is not to say 'work harder' but to say 'work smarter'. This is the only way forward and is also why increasing the focus on education is essential.
Money is also essential. One per cent is not enough! It does not make sense to talk about ambition and to define and identify with the ambition of Lisbon without doing something to the budget. This is not just about the Community budget, but it does include it. We cannot have a credible ambition for Europe without a credible budget for Europe.
Mr Titley suggested a scoreboard to show the performance of Member States' implementation efforts. I see the Kok report as an initial step along those lines. I am totally convinced that President Barroso and the incoming Commission will do its utmost in this respect.
Mr Harbour mentioned the need for the Commission to reduce red tape and to simplify procedures. An important point on the European agenda should be to look again at the existing
of directives and find out whether they could be simplified by transforming them and clarifying things to have more regulations and fewer directives. This would make it easier for economic players in Europe to find out what the existing legal situation is by reading it in a regulation instead of having to find out how directives have been implemented in all the different Member States.
To mention just one example, the Prodi Commission has reduced the different ways of tendering from 48 to 8. This is not the answer to all the problems and I would say that the Financial Regulation is still a monster. We have not reached the point of simplification that we had hoped for. One reason for this is that in reacting to the problems of the previous Commission, we perhaps added too many layers of futile
controls. I hope the Commission and Parliament will continue to look at the Financial Regulation. Confidence-building between our European institutions is necessary, but it is now necessary to build self-confidence. We can do better.
Let me turn now to some final remarks on external relations. I add my voice to the sympathy being expressed to the family of the aid worker, Margaret Hassan, particularly because we in the Commission have been funding her work and the work of her organisation in Iraq over many years.
It seems to be perpetually necessary to remind the strongest power in the world about the need to respect international humanitarian law. I was totally shocked to learn the other day that Red Crescent aid workers were not given access to Fallujah by the United States Army there. This is very, very bad and the international community – if we have one – should react very strongly against this type of behaviour. We, as Europeans, cannot create a credible basis for our relationship with an emerging democratic Iraq if we do not invest and do not clarify that it is possible for our views to differ from those of others on some points."@sl19
".
Herr talman! Under debatten framkom det att man kan ifrågasätta huruvida det saknas något alternativ till Lissabonstrategin, men det återspeglar en felaktig uppfattning om vad det verkligen handlar om. Någon enkel och lätt knipa ligger inte bakom att vi fastställde denna hållning i Lissabon, det handlar om en mer komplex och brett definierad strategi. Det är ingen
lista som är användbar för selektivt politiskt handlande, utan en välbalanserad meny. Naturligtvis är den komplex, och det var därför vi behövde omvärdera var vi står och hur vi kan förbättra utförandet. Om den inte alls hade funnits hade vi varit tvungna att uppfinna den.
När det gäller frågan om återtagande vill jag påpeka att det är nödvändigt att öka förtroendet. Det handlar inte bara om att tala om för våra grannländer och vissa avlägset belägna utvecklingsländer att de måste återta avvisade asylsökanden som härstammar från deras eget land eller eventuellt från deras grannland. Vi måste ta hänsyn till EU:s hållning i denna fråga. Vi måste erbjuda oss att dela bördan till viss del när vi gör detta. Vi måste klargöra att vi inte kommer att finansiera denna verksamhet med medel som öronmärkts för utvecklingssamarbete. Vi måste tala om tillskott, eftersom vi utökar att göra-listan.
Detta är sista gången jag talar till denna kammare. Jag vill personligen tacka er för fem mycket positiva år, både i fråga om de resultat som vi har uppnått tillsammans och på ett personligt plan.
Jag tackar er och önskar er lycka till.
En aspekt förenar utmaningen med EU:s åldrande befolkning med utmaningen att öka konkurrenskraften. I vid bemärkelse handlar detta om utbildning. Enligt min uppfattning har vi inte rätt till en livslång inkomst utan ett livslångt lärande och detta bör fastställas i stora drag. Det handlar inte bara om att upphöja Europaeliten, det är också viktigt att undersöka utbildningens vidare definition för arbetsmarknaden. I sammanhanget handlar utmaningen för EU om att förbättra konkurrenskraften genom att säga ”arbeta smartare”, inte ”arbeta mer”. Detta är den enda vägen framåt och det är också därför det är nödvändigt att satsa på utbildning.
Det behövs också pengar. En procent räcker inte! Att tala om ambitioner och att utgå ifrån Lissabonmålen, utan att något görs åt budgeten, är inte förnuftigt. Detta handlar inte endast om gemenskapens budget, men den omfattar detta. Vi kan inte ha trovärdiga mål för EU om vi saknar en trovärdig budget för EU.
Gary Titley föreslog en lista som visar hur väl medlemsstaterna lyckas när det gäller genomförandet. Jag anser att Kok-rapporten är ett första steg i den riktningen. Jag är fullständigt övertygad om att ordförande José Manuel Durão Barroso och den tillträdande kommissionen kommer att göra sitt yttersta i detta avseende.
Malcolm Harbour nämnde behovet av att kommissionen minskar byråkratin och förenklar förfarandena. En viktig fråga på EU:s dagordning borde vara att återigen se över gemenskapens befintliga regelverk av direktiv, och undersöka om det skulle kunna ändras i syfte att förenkla och förtydliga så att man får fler förordningar och färre direktiv. De ekonomiska aktörerna i EU skulle därmed lättare kunna ta reda på vilket som är det rådande rättsläget, genom att läsa det i en förordning i stället för att tvingas utröna hur ett direktiv har genomförts i de olika medlemsstaterna.
För att bara nämna ett exempel, har Prodikommissionen minskat de olika anbudsförfarandena från 48 till 8. Detta löser inte alla problem och jag anser att budgetförordningen fortfarande är monstruös. Vi har inte nått den grad av förenkling som vi hade hoppats på. En av orsakerna till detta är att vi kanske införde alltför många nivåer av meningslösa förhandskontroller när vi reagerade på den förra kommissionens problem. Jag hoppas att kommissionen och parlamentet kommer att fortsätta att se över budgetförordningen. Det är nödvändigt att öka förtroendet EU-institutionerna sinsemellan, men för tillfället är det nödvändigt att öka självförtroendet. Vi kan bli bättre.
Låt mig nu slutligen ta upp externa förbindelser. Jag instämmer i den uppskattning som har riktats till biståndsarbetaren Margaret Hassans familj, i synnerhet eftersom vi i kommissionen finansierade hennes och hennes organisations arbete i Irak under många år.
Det tycks ständigt vara nödvändigt att påminna världens stormakt om behovet att respektera internationell humanitär rätt. Jag blev helt chockad häromdagen av att höra att biståndsarbetare från Röda halvmånen hade nekats tillträde till Falluja av Förenta staternas armé där. Detta är väldigt tråkigt, och det internationella samfundet – om vi har något sådant – borde reagera mycket kraftfullt gentemot den här typen av beteende. Som européer kan vi inte skapa en trovärdig grund för våra förbindelser med det nya demokratiska Irak om vi inte investerar eller förtydligar att det är möjligt att vår uppfattning skiljer sig från vissa andras i en del frågor."@sv21
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
"(Aplausos)"20,17
"(Applause)"5,19,15,1,18,14,16,11,13,13,4
"(Loud applause)"5,19,15,1,18,14,16,11,13,4
"Commission"5,19,15,1,18,14,16,11,13,4
"Nielson,"5,19,15,1,18,14,16,11,13,4
"acquis"5,19,15,1,18,14,16,11,2,13,4,12
"ex ante"5,19,15,1,18,14,16,11,2,13,4,20,17,8
"ex ante."12
"à la carte"5,19,15,1,18,14,16,11,13,4
"élite"12
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples