Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-11-29-Speech-3-102"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech⁶
dcterms:Date	"2006-11-29"^^xsd:date⁶
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Bulgaaria ühinemine - Rumeenia ühinemine (arutelu)⁶
dcterms:Language	"en"^^xsd:language⁶
lpv:document identification number	"en.20061129.14.3-102"⁶
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2006-11-29-Speech-3-103⁶
lpv:speaker	lp:Nigel Farage⁶
lpv:spoken text	"Mr President, there is a certain inevitability about the debate today and the vote tomorrow; after all, the European Union wants to become a global power, so the argument goes that the bigger it is, the better, and that there is a nice, cosy consensus here in the Chamber. Well, not us! In 2004, UKIP was the only British party to vote against the enlargement of the European Union, arguing that the free movement of goods and services is one thing, but to have the free movement of peoples between countries with vastly differing GDPs is nothing less than wholly irresponsible. We predicted a massive migration: condemned though we were at the time, we have been proved right; there are well over half a million in Britain that are registered for work, but nobody doubts that the true figure is much nearer one million. And there is one hell of a cost to it. Already, we have 55 000 people claiming some form of State benefit. Unemployment in the UK has increased by over a quarter of a million in the last year. We have a huge over-supply in our unskilled labour market. Even the OECD said yesterday that EU enlargement had been at a very high cost to Britain. And what is our solution to all of this? To admit two countries that are even poorer than those that joined two years ago, with the inevitability, in percentage terms, of an even bigger migration! I know everyone is in denial: we have had the Bulgarian Prime Minister here, the Romanian Prime Minister here; and they are all telling us that it will not happen, that there will not be a huge movement of peoples, but of course there will. There is a much better way of doing this. We should have a proper, on-demand work permit scheme, especially for skilled workers. We have got nothing against the peoples of eastern Europe wanting to get on, but we simply cannot have an open-door immigration policy. The truth is, we cannot take the numbers. It does not make sense, and if we carry on down this road, I am afraid there is going to be bad blood and bad feeling in many towns and cities across the UK. Then we have the extraordinary role that is being played here by the rapporteur for Bulgaria, one Geoffrey Van Orden. In Chelmsford he is a fierce Eurosceptic, our brave brigadier battling for Britain, the spirit of 1940, we can all sleep well in our beds! But it is not quite the same here in Brussels, is it Geoffrey? In Brussels, you are the Commission’s man. You have done the Commission’s bidding, you have done everything you can to get Bulgaria into the European Union, and it will lead to a mass migration. In fact, you resemble Alec Guinness in the film doing completely the wrong thing for what you think is the right reason. I just hope that everybody that voted Conservative in eastern England – especially those that are about to lose their jobs – knows what you and your party have done in this place."@en⁴
lpv:spokenAs	member; INTA (2004-07-21--2007-01-14)²² substitute; PECH (2004-07-21--2007-01-14)²² unknown; UK Independence Party (2004-07-20--2009-07-13)²² member; Conference of Presidents (2004-07-20--2006-12-12)²² chair; IND/DEM (2004-12-06--2008-10-21)²²
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, there is a certain inevitability about the debate today and the vote tomorrow; after all, the European Union wants to become a global power, so the argument goes that the bigger it is, the better, and that there is a nice, cosy consensus here in the Chamber. Well, not us! In 2004, UKIP was the only British party to vote against the enlargement of the European Union, arguing that the free movement of goods and services is one thing, but to have the free movement of peoples between countries with vastly differing GDPs is nothing less than wholly irresponsible. We predicted a massive migration: condemned though we were at the time, we have been proved right; there are well over half a million in Britain that are registered for work, but nobody doubts that the true figure is much nearer one million. And there is one hell of a cost to it. Already, we have 55 000 people claiming some form of State benefit. Unemployment in the UK has increased by over a quarter of a million in the last year. We have a huge over-supply in our unskilled labour market. Even the OECD said yesterday that EU enlargement had been at a very high cost to Britain. And what is our solution to all of this? To admit two countries that are even poorer than those that joined two years ago, with the inevitability, in percentage terms, of an even bigger migration! I know everyone is in denial: we have had the Bulgarian Prime Minister here, the Romanian Prime Minister here; and they are all telling us that it will not happen, that there will not be a huge movement of peoples, but of course there will. There is a much better way of doing this. We should have a proper, on-demand work permit scheme, especially for skilled workers. We have got nothing against the peoples of eastern Europe wanting to get on, but we simply cannot have an open-door immigration policy. The truth is, we cannot take the numbers. It does not make sense, and if we carry on down this road, I am afraid there is going to be bad blood and bad feeling in many towns and cities across the UK. Then we have the extraordinary role that is being played here by the rapporteur for Bulgaria, one Geoffrey Van Orden. In Chelmsford he is a fierce Eurosceptic, our brave brigadier battling for Britain, the spirit of 1940, we can all sleep well in our beds! But it is not quite the same here in Brussels, is it Geoffrey? In Brussels, you are the Commission’s man. You have done the Commission’s bidding, you have done everything you can to get Bulgaria into the European Union, and it will lead to a mass migration. In fact, you resemble Alec Guinness in the film doing completely the wrong thing for what you think is the right reason. I just hope that everybody that voted Conservative in eastern England – especially those that are about to lose their jobs – knows what you and your party have done in this place."@cs¹ "Hr. formand! Der er en vis uafvendelighed ved forhandlingen i dag og afstemningen i morgen. EU ønsker jo trods alt at blive en global magt, så argumentet går på, at jo større den er, jo bedre, og at der hersker en rar, hyggelig enighed her i salen. Men det gælder ikke os! I 2004 var UKIP det eneste britiske parti, der stemte imod udvidelsen af EU, ud fra argumentet om, at fri bevægelighed for varer og tjenester er en ting, men fri bevægelighed for mennesker mellem lande med fuldstændig forskelligt BNP er intet mindre end totalt uansvarligt. Vi forudsagde en massiv indvandring: Selv om vi blev fordømt dengang, har det vist sig, at vi havde ret; over en halv million i Storbritannien er registreret som arbejdstagere, men ingen er i tvivl om, at det sande tal er langt tættere på en million. Og det koster skrækkeligt mange penge. Vi har allerede 55.000, der kræver en eller anden form for overførselsindkomst. Arbejdsløsheden i Det Forenede Kongerige er steget med over en kvart million sidste år. Vi har en kolossal overforsyning på vores marked for ufaglært arbejdskraft. Selv OECD sagde i går, at EU-udvidelsen havde ført til meget store udgifter for Storbritannien. Og hvad er vores løsning på alt dette? At lade to lande, der er endnu fattigere end dem, der kom med for to år siden, komme ind med det uundgåelige resultat, procentuelt, der hedder endnu større indvandring! Jeg ved, at alle afviser det: Vi har haft den bulgarske premierminister her, den rumænske premierminister har været her; og de siger alle, at det ikke vil ske, at der ikke kommer store flokke af mennesker, men naturligvis vil der det. Der findes en langt bedre måde at gøre dette på. Vi må have en egentlig, efterspørgselsstyret ordning for arbejdstilladelser, navnlig for faglært arbejdskraft. Vi har intet imod, at folk fra Østeuropa ønsker at komme videre, men vi kan simpelthen ikke have den åbne dørs indvandringspolitik. Sandheden er, at vi ikke kan rumme dem alle. Det giver ikke mening, og hvis vi fortsætter ad den vej, er jeg bange for, at der bliver ondt blod og negative følelser i mange større og mindre byer over hele Det Forenede Kongerige. Så har vi den ekstraordinære rolle, som spilles af ordføreren for Bulgarien, hr. Geoffrey Van Orden. I Chelmsford er han indædt euroskeptiker, vores tapre general, der kæmper for Storbritannien, ånden fra 1940, vi kan alle sove trygt i vores senge! Men det er ikke helt det samme her i Bruxelles, er det Geoffrey? I Bruxelles er du Kommissionens mand. Du er gået Kommissionens ærinde, du har gjort alt, hvad du kan, for at få Bulgarien ind i EU, og det vil føre til masseindvandring. Du minder faktisk om Alec Guinness i filmen . Du gør det helt forkerte ud fra det, du mener er den rette begrundelse. Jeg håber blot, at alle der har stemt konservativt i Østengland - især dem, der snart mister deres arbejde - ved, hvad du og dit parti har gjort hernede."@da² "Herr Präsident! Die heutige Aussprache und die morgige Abstimmung haben etwas Unvermeidliches. Immerhin will die Europäische Union ein globaler Akteur werden nach dem Motto: Je größer, desto besser. Und dazu müssen wir hier in diesem Hohen Haus einen netten Konsens aushandeln. Aber nicht mit uns! 2004 war die UKIP die einzige britische Partei, die gegen die Erweiterung der Europäischen Union stimmte. Sie führte an, der freie Waren- und Dienstleistungsverkehr sei eine Sache, der freie Personenverkehr zwischen Ländern mit ganz unterschiedlichen BIP sei jedoch vollkommen unverantwortlich. Wir sagten eine massenhafte Migrationswelle voraus. Obwohl man uns damals beschimpfte, haben wir Recht behalten. Weit über eine halbe Million Menschen sind in Großbritannien auf der Suche nach Arbeit, obgleich niemand daran zweifelt, dass die wahre Zahl bei etwa einer Million liegt. Und das ist zudem mit enormen Kosten verbunden. Bereits jetzt beanspruchen 55 000 Menschen irgendeine Form von staatlicher Unterstützung. Im vergangenen Jahr ist die Zahl der Arbeitslosen im Vereinigten Königreich um mehr als eine Viertel Million angestiegen. Es besteht ein riesiges Überangebot an ungelernten Arbeitskräften. Selbst die OECD erklärte gestern, die EU-Erweiterung habe äußerst hohe Kosten für Großbritannien zur Folge gehabt. Und wie sieht unsere Lösung all dieser Probleme aus? Wir nehmen zwei Länder auf, die sogar noch ärmer sind als diejenigen, die vor zwei Jahren beigetreten sind, was, prozentual gesehen, unvermeidlich eine noch größere Migration mit sich bringt! Ich weiß, das will keiner zugeben. Wir hatten den bulgarischen und den rumänischen Ministerpräsidenten hier, und beide sagten uns, dass das nicht der Fall sein wird, dass es keine massenhafte Wanderung der Menschen geben wird. Aber die wird es unweigerlich geben. Man könnte das viel besser regeln. Wir bräuchten ein geeignetes System für Arbeitserlaubnisse auf Abruf, insbesondere für Facharbeiter. Wir haben nichts dagegen, dass die Menschen aus Osteuropa vorankommen wollen, aber wir können uns einfach keine Politik leisten, die der Einwanderung Tür und Tor öffnet. Die Wahrheit ist, wir können die große Zahl nicht aufnehmen. Es hat einfach keinen Sinn, und wenn wir in diese Richtung weitergehen, wird es, so befürchte ich, in vielen Klein- und Großstädten in ganz Großbritannien böses Blut geben. Dann ist da noch die außerordentliche Rolle, die der Berichterstatter für Bulgarien, ein gewisser Geoffrey van Orden, hier spielt. In Chelmsford ist er ein erbitterter Euroskeptiker, unser mutiger Brigadegeneral, der im Geiste des Jahres 1940 für Großbritannien kämpft, damit wir alle ruhig schlafen können. Aber hier in Brüssel ist es etwas Anderes, nicht wahr, Geoffrey? In Brüssel sind Sie auf der Seite der Kommission. Sie haben getan, was die Kommission Ihnen gesagt hat, Sie haben alles in Ihrer Macht Stehende getan, um Bulgarien in die Europäische Union zu bringen, und das wird zu einer Massenmigration führen. Irgendwie ähneln Sie Alec Guiness in dem Film „Die Brücke am Kwai“ – Sie tun genau das Falsche aus dem Ihrer Ansicht nach richtigen Grund. Ich hoffe nur, dass alle, die in Ostengland die Konservativen gewählt haben, – vor allem diejenigen, die ihren Arbeitsplatz verlieren werden, – wissen, was Sie und Ihre Partei hier getan haben."@de⁹ ". Κύριε Πρόεδρε, η σημερινή συζήτηση και η αυριανή ψηφοφορία έχουν μάλλον χαρακτήρα τυπικό· στο κάτω-κάτω της γραφής, η Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση επιθυμεί να καταστεί διεθνής υπερδύναμη, οπότε το σκεπτικό είναι ότι όσο μεγαλύτερη είναι τόσο το καλύτερο, και γι’ αυτό σήμερα επικρατεί αυτή η θαυμάσια συναίνεση στο Σώμα. Εμείς, όμως, δεν μετέχουμε σε αυτή τη συναίνεση! Το 2004, το Κόμμα Ανεξαρτησίας του Ηνωμένου Βασιλείου ήταν το μόνο βρετανικό κόμμα που ψήφισε κατά της διεύρυνσης της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης, με το σκεπτικό ότι η ελεύθερη κυκλοφορία αγαθών και υπηρεσιών είναι μεν εύλογη, αλλά η ελεύθερη κυκλοφορία προσώπων μεταξύ χωρών με τεράστιες διαφορές ως προς το ΑΕγχΠ τους είναι τουλάχιστον εντελώς ανεύθυνη. Είχαμε προβλέψει ότι θα παρατηρηθεί τεράστιο μεταναστευτικό ρεύμα: παρότι είχαμε τότε καταδικαστεί, αποδείχθηκε ότι η εκτίμησή μας ήταν ορθή· στη Βρετανία εργάζονται επισήμως περισσότερα από μισό εκατομμύριο άτομα από νέα κράτη μέλη, όμως κανείς δεν αμφιβάλλει ότι ο πραγματικός αριθμός πλησιάζει περισσότερο το ένα εκατομμύριο. Το κόστος από αυτή την κατάσταση είναι τεράστιο. Ήδη, 55 000 άτομα περίπου διεκδικούν κάποια μορφή κρατικής ενίσχυσης. Ο αριθμός των ανέργων στο Ηνωμένο Βασίλειο αυξήθηκε τουλάχιστον κατά 250 000 άτομα το περασμένο έτος. Υπάρχει τεράστια υπερπροσφορά ανειδίκευτων εργατών στη αγορά εργασίας μας. Ακόμη και ο ΟΟΣΑ δήλωσε εχθές ότι η διεύρυνση της ΕΕ επιβάρυνε με πολύ υψηλό κόστος τη Βρετανία. Ποια είναι η λύση που προτείνουμε, λοιπόν, γι’ αυτή την κατάσταση; Δεχόμαστε στην ΕΕ δύο χώρες οι οποίες είναι ακόμη πιο φτωχές από τις χώρες οι οποίες εντάχθηκαν πριν από δύο χρόνια, γεγονός που καθιστά αναπόφευκτη την ακόμα μεγαλύτερη ποσοστιαία αύξηση της μετανάστευσης! Γνωρίζω ότι όλοι έχουν επιλέξει να εθελοτυφλούν: επισκέφθηκαν το Σώμα οι πρωθυπουργοί της Βουλγαρίας και της Ρουμανίας· όλοι μας διαβεβαιώνουν ότι δεν πρόκειται να συμβεί κάτι τέτοιο, ότι δεν θα υπάρξουν τεράστιες μετακινήσεις ατόμων, όμως αυτό είναι βέβαιο ότι θα συμβεί. Υπάρχει καλύτερος τρόπος χειρισμού αυτού του θέματος. Πρέπει να θεσπίσουμε ένα κατάλληλο πρόγραμμα έκδοσης αδειών εργασίας ανάλογα με τη ζήτηση, ιδίως για ειδικευμένο προσωπικό. Δεν έχουμε τίποτε εναντίον των λαών της ανατολικής Ευρώπης που θέλουν να βελτιώσουν τη ζωή τους, αλλά, απλούστατα, δεν μπορούμε να εφαρμόσουμε μια μεταναστευτική πολιτική ανοικτών θυρών. Η αλήθεια είναι ότι δεν μπορούμε να αντέξουμε αυτούς τους αριθμούς. Δεν είναι λογικό και, αν συνεχίσουμε την ίδια τακτική, φοβούμαι ότι θα δημιουργηθούν αντιπαραθέσεις και αισθήματα εχθρότητας σε πολλές πόλεις και κωμοπόλεις του Ηνωμένου Βασιλείου. Παρακολουθούμε, τέλος, με έκπληξη τον ρόλο του εισηγητή για τη Βουλγαρία στο Σώμα, ενός κ. Geoffrey Van Orden. Στο Chelmsford είναι ο αδιαπραγμάτευτος ευρωσκεπτικιστής, ο γενναίος πολεμιστής που μάχεται για τη Βρετανία, στο πνεύμα του 1940, ώστε να μπορούμε όλοι να κοιμόμαστε ήσυχοι! Δεν ισχύει, όμως, το ίδιο εδώ στις Βρυξέλλες, έτσι δεν είναι, Geoffrey; Στις Βρυξέλλες, είσαι ο άνθρωπος της Επιτροπής. Ακολουθείς τις προσταγές της Επιτροπής, έκανες ό,τι μπορούσες προκειμένου να ενταχθεί η Βουλγαρία στην Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση, γεγονός που θα προκαλέσει κύμα μαζικής μετανάστευσης. Στην πραγματικότητα, μοιάζεις με τον Άλεκ Γκίνες στην ταινία : διαπράττεις ένα τεράστιο σφάλμα για λόγους τους οποίους θεωρείς σωστούς. Ελπίζω μόνον ότι όλοι όσοι ψήφισαν υπέρ των Συντηρητικών στην ανατολική Αγγλία –ιδίως όσοι πρόκειται να χάσουν τις θέσεις εργασίας τους– θα μάθουν τι έχετε κάνει εσύ και το κόμμα σου σε αυτό το Κοινοβούλιο."@el¹⁰ "Señor Presidente, hay algo de inevitable en el debate de hoy y la votación de mañana; después de todo, la Unión Europea quiere convertirse en una potencia mundial, así que se dice que cuanto más grande, mejor, y que existe un buen consenso íntimo aquí en la Cámara. Pues no con nosotros. En 2004, el Partido por la Independencia del Reino Unido fue el único partido británico que votó en contra de la ampliación de la Unión Europea, argumentando que la libre circulación de mercancías y servicios es una cosa, pero que instaurar la libertad de circulación de personas entre países con PIB muy diferentes era nada menos que completamente irresponsable. Predijimos una migración masiva: aunque en aquel momento nos denigraron, luego resultó que estábamos en lo cierto; en el Reino Unido hay más de medio millón de personas inscritas para buscar trabajo, pero nadie duda de que la cifra verdadera está mucho más cerca del millón. Y esto cuesta un montón de dinero. Tenemos ya 55 000 personas cobrando algún tipo de prestaciones públicas. El desempleo en el Reino Unido ha aumentado en más de un cuarto de millón el año pasado. Tenemos una inmensa oferta excedentaria en nuestro mercado de trabajo no cualificado. Incluso la OCDE dijo ayer que la ampliación de la UE había supuesto un coste muy elevado para Gran Bretaña. ¿Y cuál es nuestra solución de todo esto? Admitir a dos países que son todavía más pobres que los que se unieron hace dos años, con la inevitabilidad, en términos porcentuales, de una migración aún mayor. Sé que todos lo niegan: han estado aquí el Primer Ministro búlgaro y el Primer Ministro rumano; y todos nos dicen que no va a suceder, que no habrá un desplazamiento masivo de personas, pero está claro que sí lo habrá. Hay una forma mucho mejor de hacerlo. Debemos tener un sistema adecuado de permisos de trabajo en función de la demanda, especialmente de trabajadores cualificados. No tenemos nada en contra de que las personas de Europa Oriental quieran entrar, pero, simplemente, no podemos tener una política de inmigración de puertas abiertas. La verdad es que no podemos aceptar a tantas personas. No tiene sentido, y si seguimos por este camino, me temo que habrá animosidad y malos sentimientos en muchas ciudades y poblaciones en todo el Reino Unido. Luego tenemos el extraordinario papel desempeñado aquí por un ponente sobre Bulgaria, un tal Geoffrey van Orden. En Chelmsford es un feroz euroescéptico, nuestro valiente general de brigada luchando por Gran Bretaña, el espíritu de 1940, todos podemos dormir tranquilos en nuestras camas. Pero no es lo mismo aquí en Bruselas, ¿verdad, Geoffrey? En Bruselas, usted es el hombre de la Comisión. Usted ha hecho lo que la Comisión le ordenaba, ha hecho todo lo posible por que Bulgaria entrara en la Unión Europea, y esto generará una migración masiva. De hecho, se parece usted a Alec Guinness en la película cometiendo un completo error por un motivo que usted considera correcto. Solo espero que todos los que votaron por los conservadores en el este de Inglaterra, especialmente los que están a punto de perder sus puestos de trabajo, sepan lo que usted y su partido han hecho en este lugar."@es²⁰ "Mr President, there is a certain inevitability about the debate today and the vote tomorrow; after all, the European Union wants to become a global power, so the argument goes that the bigger it is, the better, and that there is a nice, cosy consensus here in the Chamber. Well, not us! In 2004, UKIP was the only British party to vote against the enlargement of the European Union, arguing that the free movement of goods and services is one thing, but to have the free movement of peoples between countries with vastly differing GDPs is nothing less than wholly irresponsible. We predicted a massive migration: condemned though we were at the time, we have been proved right; there are well over half a million in Britain that are registered for work, but nobody doubts that the true figure is much nearer one million. And there is one hell of a cost to it. Already, we have 55 000 people claiming some form of State benefit. Unemployment in the UK has increased by over a quarter of a million in the last year. We have a huge over-supply in our unskilled labour market. Even the OECD said yesterday that EU enlargement had been at a very high cost to Britain. And what is our solution to all of this? To admit two countries that are even poorer than those that joined two years ago, with the inevitability, in percentage terms, of an even bigger migration! I know everyone is in denial: we have had the Bulgarian Prime Minister here, the Romanian Prime Minister here; and they are all telling us that it will not happen, that there will not be a huge movement of peoples, but of course there will. There is a much better way of doing this. We should have a proper, on-demand work permit scheme, especially for skilled workers. We have got nothing against the peoples of eastern Europe wanting to get on, but we simply cannot have an open-door immigration policy. The truth is, we cannot take the numbers. It does not make sense, and if we carry on down this road, I am afraid there is going to be bad blood and bad feeling in many towns and cities across the UK. Then we have the extraordinary role that is being played here by the rapporteur for Bulgaria, one Geoffrey Van Orden. In Chelmsford he is a fierce Eurosceptic, our brave brigadier battling for Britain, the spirit of 1940, we can all sleep well in our beds! But it is not quite the same here in Brussels, is it Geoffrey? In Brussels, you are the Commission’s man. You have done the Commission’s bidding, you have done everything you can to get Bulgaria into the European Union, and it will lead to a mass migration. In fact, you resemble Alec Guinness in the film doing completely the wrong thing for what you think is the right reason. I just hope that everybody that voted Conservative in eastern England – especially those that are about to lose their jobs – knows what you and your party have done in this place."@et⁵ "Arvoisa puhemies, tämänpäiväisessä keskustelussa ja huomisessa äänestyksessä on jotain vääjäämätöntä. Pohjimmiltaan Euroopan unioni haluaa olla maailmanlaajuinen vaikuttaja, joten kyseisen logiikan mukaan EU on sitä parempi, mitä suurempi se on, ja Euroopan parlamentissa vallitsee asiasta mukava ja kotoisa yhteisymmärrys. Tämä ei kuitenkaan koske meitä! Vuona 2004 UKIP oli Yhdistyneen kuningaskunnan puolueista ainoa, joka äänesti Euroopan unionin laajentumista vastaan. Puolue perusteli kantaansa sillä, että tavaroiden ja palveluiden vapaa liikkuvuus on asia erikseen, mutta henkilöiden vapaa liikkuvuus BKT:ltaan huomattavan erilaisten maiden välillä on täysin vastuutonta. Ennustimme joukkomuuttoa, ja vaikka meitä tuolloin paheksuttiin, arviomme osoittautui oikeaksi. Yhdistyneessä kuningaskunnassa reilusti yli puoli miljoonaa henkilöä on rekisteröitynyt työntekijöiksi, mutta kaikille on selvää, että todellinen lukumäärä on paljon lähempänä miljoonaa. Tästä maksetaan erittäin kova hinta, sillä jo nyt 55 000 ihmistä hakee julkisia etuuksia. Työttömien määrä lisääntyi viime vuonna Yhdistyneessä kuningaskunnassa yli neljännesmiljoonalla. Kouluttamattoman työvoiman markkinoilla on valtava ylitarjonta. Jopa OECD:n edustaja totesi eilen, että Yhdistynyt kuningaskunta on maksanut EU:n laajentumisesta erittäin kovan hinnan. Mikä on meidän ratkaisumme tässä tilanteessa? Otamme jäseniksi kaksi maata, jotka ovat vielä köyhempiä kuin kaksi vuotta sitten liittyneet jäsenmaat, jolloin muuttoliikkeen osuus kasvaa väistämättä! Tiedän, ettei kukaan myönnä tätä. Bulgarian pääministeri ja Romanian pääministeri vierailivat parlamentissa ja vakuuttivat, ettei näin käy ja ettei joukkomuuttoa tule, mutta tietenkin sellainen tulee. Tämä voidaan hoitaa paljon paremmin. EU:lla pitäisi olla asianmukainen kysyntään perustuva työlupajärjestelmä etenkin ammattitaitoiselle työvoimalle. Meillä ei ole mitään sitä vastaan, että itäeurooppalaiset haluavat menestyä, mutta emme yksinkertaisesti voi harjoittaa avoimien ovien maahanmuuttopolitiikkaa. Totuus on, että maahanmuuttajien määrä ylittää vastaanottokykymme. Tässä ei ole järkeä, ja jos jatkamme samaa rataa, pelkään sen herättävän paheksuntaa ja kaunaa monissa Yhdistyneen kuningaskunnan kaupungeissa. Käsittelen vielä sitä omituista roolia, jota Bulgariaa koskevan mietinnön esittelijä Geoffrey Van Orden vetää Euroopan parlamentissa. Chelmsfordissa hän on kiihkeä euroskeptikko, joka puolustaa urheasti Britanniaa 1940-luvun hengessä, jotta voimme kaikki nukkua yömme rauhassa! Brysselissä asiat ovat kuitenkin toisin, vai mitä Geoffrey? Brysselissä olette komission asialla. Olette noudattanut komission tahtoa ja tehnyt kaikkenne saadaksenne Bulgarian Euroopan unionin jäseneksi, mikä johtaa joukkomuuttoon. Itse asiassa muistutatte Alec Guinnessia elokuvassa : toimitte aivan väärin mielestänne täysin oikeasta syystä. Toivon vain, että kaikki, jotka äänestivät konservatiiveja Itä-Englannissa – varsinkin ne, jotka ovat jäämässä työttömiksi – tietävät, mitä te ja puolueenne olette tehneet Euroopan parlamentissa."@fi⁷ ". Monsieur le Président, il semble que le débat d’aujourd’hui et le vote de demain soient inévitables; après tout, puisque l’Union européenne veut devenir une puissance internationale, plus elle est grande, mieux c’est, et il y a un confortable consensus à ce sujet dans cette Assemblée. Et bien ce n’est pas notre cas! En 2004, le parti pour l’indépendance du Royaume-Uni a été le seul parti britannique à voter contre l’élargissement de l’Union européenne, expliquant que la libre circulation des biens et des services est une chose, mais celle des personnes entre des pays aux PIB si différents n’est rien d’autre que de la pure irresponsabilité. Nous avions prédit une migration de masse: bien que nous ayons été l’objet de critiques à cette époque, il s’avère que nous avons eu raison; il y a plus d’un demi-million de personnes en Grande-Bretagne qui attendent du travail, mais personne ne doute que le chiffre réel est bien plus proche du million. Et cela nous coûte très cher. Nous avons déjà 55 000 personnes qui demandent d’une façon ou d’une autre des allocations de l’État. Au Royaume-Uni, le chômage a augmenté de plus de 250 000 personnes l’année dernière. Nous sommes en sureffectif sur notre marché du travail pour les travailleurs non qualifiés. Même l’OCDE a annoncé hier que l’élargissement avait coûté très cher à la Grande-Bretagne. Et quelle est notre solution à tout cela? Admettre deux pays qui sont encore plus pauvres que ceux qui ont rejoint l’UE il y a deux ans, avec inévitablement, en termes de pourcentage, une migration encore plus importante! Je sais que tout le monde le nie: nous avons eu ici le Premier ministre bulgare, le Premier ministre roumain; et ils nous disent que cela n’arrivera pas, qu’il n’y aura pas de grands déplacements de personnes, mais bien sûr qu’il y en aura. Il y a une bien meilleure façon de faire. Nous devrions avoir un système de permis de travail proprement dit, à la demande, en particulier pour les travailleurs qualifiés. Nous n’avons rien contre les citoyens d’Europe de l’Est qui veulent venir, mais nous ne pouvons simplement pas avoir une politique d’immigration ouverte à tous. En vérité, nous ne pouvons pas accepter les immigrants en nombre. Cela n’a aucun sens, et si nous persistons sur cette voie, j’ai bien peur que les esprits ne s’échauffent dans de nombreuses villes du Royaume-Uni. Nous avons ensuite le rôle extraordinaire que joue ici le rapporteur pour la Bulgarie, un certain Van Orden. À Chelmsford, c’est un eurosceptique convaincu, notre brave soldat se battant pour la Grande-Bretagne, avec l’esprit de 1940, nous pouvons tous dormir tranquilles. Mais ce n’est pas tout à fait pareil ici, à Bruxelles, n’est-ce pas Geoffrey? À Bruxelles, vous êtes l’homme de la Commission. Vous avez obéit aux ordres de la Commission, vous avez fait tout ce que vous pouviez pour avoir la Bulgarie dans l’Union européenne, et cela engendrera une migration de masse. En fait, vous ressemblez à Alec Guinness dans le film vous vous trompez complètement sur ce que vous pensez être la bonne raison. J’espère seulement que tous ceux qui ont voté pour les Conservateurs dans l’est de l’Angleterre - en particulier ceux qui sont sur le point de perdre leur emploi - savent ce que vous et votre parti avez fait dans cette Assemblée."@fr⁸ "Mr President, there is a certain inevitability about the debate today and the vote tomorrow; after all, the European Union wants to become a global power, so the argument goes that the bigger it is, the better, and that there is a nice, cosy consensus here in the Chamber. Well, not us! In 2004, UKIP was the only British party to vote against the enlargement of the European Union, arguing that the free movement of goods and services is one thing, but to have the free movement of peoples between countries with vastly differing GDPs is nothing less than wholly irresponsible. We predicted a massive migration: condemned though we were at the time, we have been proved right; there are well over half a million in Britain that are registered for work, but nobody doubts that the true figure is much nearer one million. And there is one hell of a cost to it. Already, we have 55 000 people claiming some form of State benefit. Unemployment in the UK has increased by over a quarter of a million in the last year. We have a huge over-supply in our unskilled labour market. Even the OECD said yesterday that EU enlargement had been at a very high cost to Britain. And what is our solution to all of this? To admit two countries that are even poorer than those that joined two years ago, with the inevitability, in percentage terms, of an even bigger migration! I know everyone is in denial: we have had the Bulgarian Prime Minister here, the Romanian Prime Minister here; and they are all telling us that it will not happen, that there will not be a huge movement of peoples, but of course there will. There is a much better way of doing this. We should have a proper, on-demand work permit scheme, especially for skilled workers. We have got nothing against the peoples of eastern Europe wanting to get on, but we simply cannot have an open-door immigration policy. The truth is, we cannot take the numbers. It does not make sense, and if we carry on down this road, I am afraid there is going to be bad blood and bad feeling in many towns and cities across the UK. Then we have the extraordinary role that is being played here by the rapporteur for Bulgaria, one Geoffrey Van Orden. In Chelmsford he is a fierce Eurosceptic, our brave brigadier battling for Britain, the spirit of 1940, we can all sleep well in our beds! But it is not quite the same here in Brussels, is it Geoffrey? In Brussels, you are the Commission’s man. You have done the Commission’s bidding, you have done everything you can to get Bulgaria into the European Union, and it will lead to a mass migration. In fact, you resemble Alec Guinness in the film doing completely the wrong thing for what you think is the right reason. I just hope that everybody that voted Conservative in eastern England – especially those that are about to lose their jobs – knows what you and your party have done in this place."@hu¹¹ "Signor Presidente, il dibattito di oggi e la votazione di domani hanno in sé una certa inevitabilità; dopo tutto, l’Unione europea vuole diventare una potenza mondiale, per cui si sostiene che più è grande e meglio è, e a questo proposito qui in Aula esiste un rassicurante consenso. Questo non vale certo per noi! Nel 2004 l’UKIP è stato l’unico partito britannico a votare contro l’allargamento dell’Unione europea, partendo dal presupposto che un conto è la libera circolazione di merci e servizi, un altro è l’idea del tutto irresponsabile della libera circolazione delle persone tra paesi con PIL tra i quali esiste un enorme divario. All’epoca eravamo stati condannati per aver previsto un’immigrazione di massa, ma i fatti hanno dimostrato che avevamo ragione. Nel Regno Unito gli immigrati registrati per lo svolgimento di un’attività lavorativa sono più di mezzo milione, ma nessuno dubita che la cifra effettiva sia molto più prossima a un milione. Il costo di tale immigrazione è maledettamente elevato. Sono già 55 000 le persone che chiedono di poter usufruire di qualche forma di prestazione statale. Nell’ultimo anno il numero di disoccupati nel Regno Unito è aumentato di più di un quarto di milione. Si registra una considerevole eccedenza di offerta sul mercato della manodopera non qualificata. Persino l’OCSE ha detto ieri che l’allargamento dell’UE ha avuto un costo molto alto per il Regno Unito. Di fronte a tutto questo, qual è la soluzione da noi proposta? Ammettere due paesi che sono ancor più poveri di quelli che hanno aderito due anni fa, con l’inevitabile conseguenza, in termini percentuali, di un ulteriore aumento dell’immigrazione. So che tutti lo negano: il Primo Ministro bulgaro e il Primo Ministro rumeno sono stati qui in Aula, ed entrambi hanno detto che non accadrà nulla del genere, che non si verificherà un immenso movimento di persone, ma è ovvio che sarà vero il contrario. Vi è un modo molto migliore per risolvere il problema. Si dovrebbe prevedere un adeguato regime di rilascio di permessi di lavoro su richiesta, soprattutto per quanto riguarda i lavoratori qualificati. Non abbiamo niente contro i popoli dell’Europa orientale che vogliono migliorare la loro condizione, ma non possiamo semplicemente applicare una politica di apertura delle porte all’immigrazione. La verità è che non possiamo accogliere grandi masse di persone. Non ha senso e, se proseguiremo su questa strada, temo che emergeranno tensioni e sentimenti di astio e di avversione in molte città dell’intero Regno Unito. Vi è poi il ruolo straordinario svolto in quest’ambito dal relatore che si è occupato dell’adesione della Bulgaria, onorevole Geoffrey Van Orden. A Chelmsford è un feroce euroscettico, che si comporta come un coraggioso generale di brigata che, animato da uno spirito che rimanda a quello vigente nel 1940, combatte per il Regno Unito in modo che si possano dormire sonni tranquilli. Non si può dire che qui a Bruxelles accada lo stesso, vero Geoffrey? A Bruxelles sei al servizio della Commissione, di cui hai eseguito gli ordini facendo tutto il possibile per ottenere l’ingresso della Bulgaria nell’Unione europea, che comporterà un’immigrazione di massa. In effetti, facendo una cosa completamente sbagliata per quello che ritieni un giusto motivo, assomigli ad Alec Guinness nel film “ ”. Mi auguro solo che tutti coloro che hanno votato per i conservatori nell’Inghilterra orientale, e soprattutto coloro che stanno per perdere il posto di lavoro, sappiano ciò che tu e il tuo partito avete fatto in questo luogo."@it¹² "Mr President, there is a certain inevitability about the debate today and the vote tomorrow; after all, the European Union wants to become a global power, so the argument goes that the bigger it is, the better, and that there is a nice, cosy consensus here in the Chamber. Well, not us! In 2004, UKIP was the only British party to vote against the enlargement of the European Union, arguing that the free movement of goods and services is one thing, but to have the free movement of peoples between countries with vastly differing GDPs is nothing less than wholly irresponsible. We predicted a massive migration: condemned though we were at the time, we have been proved right; there are well over half a million in Britain that are registered for work, but nobody doubts that the true figure is much nearer one million. And there is one hell of a cost to it. Already, we have 55 000 people claiming some form of State benefit. Unemployment in the UK has increased by over a quarter of a million in the last year. We have a huge over-supply in our unskilled labour market. Even the OECD said yesterday that EU enlargement had been at a very high cost to Britain. And what is our solution to all of this? To admit two countries that are even poorer than those that joined two years ago, with the inevitability, in percentage terms, of an even bigger migration! I know everyone is in denial: we have had the Bulgarian Prime Minister here, the Romanian Prime Minister here; and they are all telling us that it will not happen, that there will not be a huge movement of peoples, but of course there will. There is a much better way of doing this. We should have a proper, on-demand work permit scheme, especially for skilled workers. We have got nothing against the peoples of eastern Europe wanting to get on, but we simply cannot have an open-door immigration policy. The truth is, we cannot take the numbers. It does not make sense, and if we carry on down this road, I am afraid there is going to be bad blood and bad feeling in many towns and cities across the UK. Then we have the extraordinary role that is being played here by the rapporteur for Bulgaria, one Geoffrey Van Orden. In Chelmsford he is a fierce Eurosceptic, our brave brigadier battling for Britain, the spirit of 1940, we can all sleep well in our beds! But it is not quite the same here in Brussels, is it Geoffrey? In Brussels, you are the Commission’s man. You have done the Commission’s bidding, you have done everything you can to get Bulgaria into the European Union, and it will lead to a mass migration. In fact, you resemble Alec Guinness in the film doing completely the wrong thing for what you think is the right reason. I just hope that everybody that voted Conservative in eastern England – especially those that are about to lose their jobs – knows what you and your party have done in this place."@lt¹⁴ "Mr President, there is a certain inevitability about the debate today and the vote tomorrow; after all, the European Union wants to become a global power, so the argument goes that the bigger it is, the better, and that there is a nice, cosy consensus here in the Chamber. Well, not us! In 2004, UKIP was the only British party to vote against the enlargement of the European Union, arguing that the free movement of goods and services is one thing, but to have the free movement of peoples between countries with vastly differing GDPs is nothing less than wholly irresponsible. We predicted a massive migration: condemned though we were at the time, we have been proved right; there are well over half a million in Britain that are registered for work, but nobody doubts that the true figure is much nearer one million. And there is one hell of a cost to it. Already, we have 55 000 people claiming some form of State benefit. Unemployment in the UK has increased by over a quarter of a million in the last year. We have a huge over-supply in our unskilled labour market. Even the OECD said yesterday that EU enlargement had been at a very high cost to Britain. And what is our solution to all of this? To admit two countries that are even poorer than those that joined two years ago, with the inevitability, in percentage terms, of an even bigger migration! I know everyone is in denial: we have had the Bulgarian Prime Minister here, the Romanian Prime Minister here; and they are all telling us that it will not happen, that there will not be a huge movement of peoples, but of course there will. There is a much better way of doing this. We should have a proper, on-demand work permit scheme, especially for skilled workers. We have got nothing against the peoples of eastern Europe wanting to get on, but we simply cannot have an open-door immigration policy. The truth is, we cannot take the numbers. It does not make sense, and if we carry on down this road, I am afraid there is going to be bad blood and bad feeling in many towns and cities across the UK. Then we have the extraordinary role that is being played here by the rapporteur for Bulgaria, one Geoffrey Van Orden. In Chelmsford he is a fierce Eurosceptic, our brave brigadier battling for Britain, the spirit of 1940, we can all sleep well in our beds! But it is not quite the same here in Brussels, is it Geoffrey? In Brussels, you are the Commission’s man. You have done the Commission’s bidding, you have done everything you can to get Bulgaria into the European Union, and it will lead to a mass migration. In fact, you resemble Alec Guinness in the film doing completely the wrong thing for what you think is the right reason. I just hope that everybody that voted Conservative in eastern England – especially those that are about to lose their jobs – knows what you and your party have done in this place."@lv¹³ "Mr President, there is a certain inevitability about the debate today and the vote tomorrow; after all, the European Union wants to become a global power, so the argument goes that the bigger it is, the better, and that there is a nice, cosy consensus here in the Chamber. Well, not us! In 2004, UKIP was the only British party to vote against the enlargement of the European Union, arguing that the free movement of goods and services is one thing, but to have the free movement of peoples between countries with vastly differing GDPs is nothing less than wholly irresponsible. We predicted a massive migration: condemned though we were at the time, we have been proved right; there are well over half a million in Britain that are registered for work, but nobody doubts that the true figure is much nearer one million. And there is one hell of a cost to it. Already, we have 55 000 people claiming some form of State benefit. Unemployment in the UK has increased by over a quarter of a million in the last year. We have a huge over-supply in our unskilled labour market. Even the OECD said yesterday that EU enlargement had been at a very high cost to Britain. And what is our solution to all of this? To admit two countries that are even poorer than those that joined two years ago, with the inevitability, in percentage terms, of an even bigger migration! I know everyone is in denial: we have had the Bulgarian Prime Minister here, the Romanian Prime Minister here; and they are all telling us that it will not happen, that there will not be a huge movement of peoples, but of course there will. There is a much better way of doing this. We should have a proper, on-demand work permit scheme, especially for skilled workers. We have got nothing against the peoples of eastern Europe wanting to get on, but we simply cannot have an open-door immigration policy. The truth is, we cannot take the numbers. It does not make sense, and if we carry on down this road, I am afraid there is going to be bad blood and bad feeling in many towns and cities across the UK. Then we have the extraordinary role that is being played here by the rapporteur for Bulgaria, one Geoffrey Van Orden. In Chelmsford he is a fierce Eurosceptic, our brave brigadier battling for Britain, the spirit of 1940, we can all sleep well in our beds! But it is not quite the same here in Brussels, is it Geoffrey? In Brussels, you are the Commission’s man. You have done the Commission’s bidding, you have done everything you can to get Bulgaria into the European Union, and it will lead to a mass migration. In fact, you resemble Alec Guinness in the film doing completely the wrong thing for what you think is the right reason. I just hope that everybody that voted Conservative in eastern England – especially those that are about to lose their jobs – knows what you and your party have done in this place."@mt¹⁵ "Mijnheer de Voorzitter, de uitkomst van het debat van vandaag en de stemming van morgen staat eigenlijk al vast. De Europese Unie wil per slot van rekening een wereldmacht worden, dus is het “hoe groter, hoe beter”, en heerst er hier in het Parlement een gezellige consensus. Nou, voor ons geldt dat niet! In 2004 was de UKIP de enige Britse partij die tegen de uitbreiding van de Europese Unie stemde, met het argument dat vrij verkeer van goederen en diensten best is, maar dat vrij verkeer van mensen tussen landen met zeer uiteenlopende BBP’s niets minder dan volstrekt onverantwoord is. Wij voorspelden een massale migratie. Daarvoor werden we destijds aan de schandpaal genageld, maar we bleken gelijk te hebben. Ruim een half miljoen Britten staan geregistreerd als werkzoekend, maar niemand twijfelt eraan dat het werkelijke cijfer dicht bij de één miljoen ligt. En dat kost bakken met geld. We hebben al 55 000 mensen die enigerlei vorm van staatssteun eisen. De werkloosheid in het Verenigd Koninkrijk is het afgelopen jaar met meer dan een kwart miljoen gestegen. Bij ons is er sprake van een gigantisch overaanbod aan ongeschoolde arbeidskrachten. Zelfs de OESO heeft gisteren gezegd dat de uitbreiding van de EU het Verenigd Koninkrijk ontzettend veel heeft gekost. En met welke oplossing komen we nu? We laten twee landen toe die nog armer zijn dan de landen die twee jaar geleden zijn toegetreden, wat procentueel gezien onvermijdelijk tot een nog sterkere migratie leidt! Ik weet dat iedereen hiervoor de ogen sluit. De Bulgaarse premier is hier geweest, de Roemeense premier is hier geweest, en ze vertellen ons dat het niet zal gebeuren, dat er geen enorme beweging van mensen zal plaatsvinden. Maar dat gebeurt natuurlijk wel. Er is een veel betere aanpak. Er zou een fatsoenlijk uitgiftesysteem van werkvergunningen moeten komen, met name voor geschoolde werknemers. We hebben niets tegen de mensen uit Oost-Europa die vooruit willen komen, maar een open-deur immigratiebeleid is simpelweg onaanvaardbaar, gewoon omdat we de aantallen niet aankunnen. Het slaat nergens op, en als we verdergaan op deze weg, dan ben ik bang dat dat kwaad bloed zet in veel plaatsen en steden in het Verenigd Koninkrijk. Dan is er nog de bijzondere rol die in dit verhaal wordt gespeeld door de rapporteur voor Bulgarije, Geoffrey Van Orden. In Chelmsford is hij een fel Euroscepticus, onze dappere brigadecommandant die voor Engeland knokt in de geest van 1940; we kunnen allemaal rustig gaan slapen! Maar hier in Brussel ligt het allemaal een tikje anders, nietwaar Geoffrey? In Brussel ben je de man van de Commissie. Je hebt naar het pijpen van de Commissie gedanst, en hebt alles gedaan om Bulgarije in de Europese Unie te krijgen, wat zal leiden tot massale migratie. Je lijkt Alec Guinness wel in de film door het verkeerde te doen om, naar jouw idee, de juiste reden. Ik hoop dat iedereen in Oost-Engeland die op de conservatieven heeft gestemd, vooral degenen die op het punt staan hun baan te verliezen, weten wat jij en je partij hebben aangericht."@nl³ "Mr President, there is a certain inevitability about the debate today and the vote tomorrow; after all, the European Union wants to become a global power, so the argument goes that the bigger it is, the better, and that there is a nice, cosy consensus here in the Chamber. Well, not us! In 2004, UKIP was the only British party to vote against the enlargement of the European Union, arguing that the free movement of goods and services is one thing, but to have the free movement of peoples between countries with vastly differing GDPs is nothing less than wholly irresponsible. We predicted a massive migration: condemned though we were at the time, we have been proved right; there are well over half a million in Britain that are registered for work, but nobody doubts that the true figure is much nearer one million. And there is one hell of a cost to it. Already, we have 55 000 people claiming some form of State benefit. Unemployment in the UK has increased by over a quarter of a million in the last year. We have a huge over-supply in our unskilled labour market. Even the OECD said yesterday that EU enlargement had been at a very high cost to Britain. And what is our solution to all of this? To admit two countries that are even poorer than those that joined two years ago, with the inevitability, in percentage terms, of an even bigger migration! I know everyone is in denial: we have had the Bulgarian Prime Minister here, the Romanian Prime Minister here; and they are all telling us that it will not happen, that there will not be a huge movement of peoples, but of course there will. There is a much better way of doing this. We should have a proper, on-demand work permit scheme, especially for skilled workers. We have got nothing against the peoples of eastern Europe wanting to get on, but we simply cannot have an open-door immigration policy. The truth is, we cannot take the numbers. It does not make sense, and if we carry on down this road, I am afraid there is going to be bad blood and bad feeling in many towns and cities across the UK. Then we have the extraordinary role that is being played here by the rapporteur for Bulgaria, one Geoffrey Van Orden. In Chelmsford he is a fierce Eurosceptic, our brave brigadier battling for Britain, the spirit of 1940, we can all sleep well in our beds! But it is not quite the same here in Brussels, is it Geoffrey? In Brussels, you are the Commission’s man. You have done the Commission’s bidding, you have done everything you can to get Bulgaria into the European Union, and it will lead to a mass migration. In fact, you resemble Alec Guinness in the film doing completely the wrong thing for what you think is the right reason. I just hope that everybody that voted Conservative in eastern England – especially those that are about to lose their jobs – knows what you and your party have done in this place."@pl¹⁶ "Senhor Presidente, há uma certa inevitabilidade no debate de hoje e na votação de amanhã; bem vistas as coisas, a União Europeia quer tornar-se uma potência mundial, por isso, o argumento que melhor lhe serve é: quanto maior for, melhor será. Existe pois um simpático e agradável consenso nesta Câmara. Pois bem, não da nossa parte! Em 2004, o Partido da Independência do Reino Unido (UKIP) foi o único partido britânico a votar contra o alargamento da União Europeia, afirmando que a livre circulação de mercadorias e serviços é uma coisa, mas que a liberdade de circulação de pessoas entre países com PIB tão divergentes nada mais é do que uma total irresponsabilidade. Previmos uma migração maciça. Na altura, fomos vivamente condenados, porém, o tempo deu-nos razão: existem bem mais do que meio milhão de estrangeiros no Reino Unido registados para poderem trabalhar, mas ninguém duvida que os verdadeiros números estejam muito mais próximos do milhão. E isso acarreta custos extraordinários. Existem, já hoje, 55 000 pessoas que exigem alguma forma de benefício estatal. O desemprego no Reino Unido aumentou em mais de um quarto de milhão, no último ano. Existe uma oferta excessiva de pessoas no nosso mercado de trabalho não qualificado. Até a OECD afirmou ontem que o alargamento da UE teve custos muito elevados para o Reino Unido. E qual é a nossa solução para tudo isto? Admitir mais dois novos países, ainda mais pobres do que os que aderiram há dois anos, com a inevitabilidade, em termos percentuais, de uma migração ainda mais elevada! Estou ciente de que todos se esforçam por negá-lo: tivemos aqui o Primeiro-Ministro búlgaro e o Primeiro-Ministro romeno, e ambos nos dizem que isso não acontecerá, que não haverá grandes movimentos de pessoas, mas é óbvio que haverá. Podemos fazer melhor. Deveríamos dispor de um regime adequado de trabalho a pedido, especialmente para trabalhadores qualificados. Nada temos contra os povos da Europa Oriental que pretendem aderir, mas, pura e simplesmente, não podemos praticar uma política de imigração de portas escancaradas. A verdade é que, não podemos absorver estes números. Não faz sentido, e se nos mantivermos nessa rota, receio que venham a surgir incidentes e a crescer os sentimentos de oposição em muitas aldeias e cidades do Reino Unido. Depois temos o trabalho extraordinário desenvolvido aqui pelo relator sobre a Bulgária, um tal Geoffrey Van Orden. Em Chelmsford, é um feroz eurocéptico, o nosso bravo brigadeiro em luta pelo Reino Unido, no espírito de 1940, que garante que todos podemos dormir sossegados nas nossas camas! Porém, não é totalmente o mesmo aqui em Bruxelas, não é, Geoffrey? Em Bruxelas, és o pau mandado da Comissão. Trataste da oferta da Comissão, fizeste tudo o que esteve ao teu alcance para conseguir que a Bulgária aderisse à União Europeia, e isso conduzirá a uma migração maciça. Na verdade, pareces-te com Alec Guinness no filme cometendo o maior erro por aquele que consideras ser o melhor motivo. Resta-me esperar que todos os que votaram no Partido Conservador no Leste de Inglaterra – especialmente aqueles que estão prestes a perder o seu emprego – saibam o que tu e o teu partido aqui fizeram."@pt¹⁷ "Mr President, there is a certain inevitability about the debate today and the vote tomorrow; after all, the European Union wants to become a global power, so the argument goes that the bigger it is, the better, and that there is a nice, cosy consensus here in the Chamber. Well, not us! In 2004, UKIP was the only British party to vote against the enlargement of the European Union, arguing that the free movement of goods and services is one thing, but to have the free movement of peoples between countries with vastly differing GDPs is nothing less than wholly irresponsible. We predicted a massive migration: condemned though we were at the time, we have been proved right; there are well over half a million in Britain that are registered for work, but nobody doubts that the true figure is much nearer one million. And there is one hell of a cost to it. Already, we have 55 000 people claiming some form of State benefit. Unemployment in the UK has increased by over a quarter of a million in the last year. We have a huge over-supply in our unskilled labour market. Even the OECD said yesterday that EU enlargement had been at a very high cost to Britain. And what is our solution to all of this? To admit two countries that are even poorer than those that joined two years ago, with the inevitability, in percentage terms, of an even bigger migration! I know everyone is in denial: we have had the Bulgarian Prime Minister here, the Romanian Prime Minister here; and they are all telling us that it will not happen, that there will not be a huge movement of peoples, but of course there will. There is a much better way of doing this. We should have a proper, on-demand work permit scheme, especially for skilled workers. We have got nothing against the peoples of eastern Europe wanting to get on, but we simply cannot have an open-door immigration policy. The truth is, we cannot take the numbers. It does not make sense, and if we carry on down this road, I am afraid there is going to be bad blood and bad feeling in many towns and cities across the UK. Then we have the extraordinary role that is being played here by the rapporteur for Bulgaria, one Geoffrey Van Orden. In Chelmsford he is a fierce Eurosceptic, our brave brigadier battling for Britain, the spirit of 1940, we can all sleep well in our beds! But it is not quite the same here in Brussels, is it Geoffrey? In Brussels, you are the Commission’s man. You have done the Commission’s bidding, you have done everything you can to get Bulgaria into the European Union, and it will lead to a mass migration. In fact, you resemble Alec Guinness in the film doing completely the wrong thing for what you think is the right reason. I just hope that everybody that voted Conservative in eastern England – especially those that are about to lose their jobs – knows what you and your party have done in this place."@sk¹⁸ "Mr President, there is a certain inevitability about the debate today and the vote tomorrow; after all, the European Union wants to become a global power, so the argument goes that the bigger it is, the better, and that there is a nice, cosy consensus here in the Chamber. Well, not us! In 2004, UKIP was the only British party to vote against the enlargement of the European Union, arguing that the free movement of goods and services is one thing, but to have the free movement of peoples between countries with vastly differing GDPs is nothing less than wholly irresponsible. We predicted a massive migration: condemned though we were at the time, we have been proved right; there are well over half a million in Britain that are registered for work, but nobody doubts that the true figure is much nearer one million. And there is one hell of a cost to it. Already, we have 55 000 people claiming some form of State benefit. Unemployment in the UK has increased by over a quarter of a million in the last year. We have a huge over-supply in our unskilled labour market. Even the OECD said yesterday that EU enlargement had been at a very high cost to Britain. And what is our solution to all of this? To admit two countries that are even poorer than those that joined two years ago, with the inevitability, in percentage terms, of an even bigger migration! I know everyone is in denial: we have had the Bulgarian Prime Minister here, the Romanian Prime Minister here; and they are all telling us that it will not happen, that there will not be a huge movement of peoples, but of course there will. There is a much better way of doing this. We should have a proper, on-demand work permit scheme, especially for skilled workers. We have got nothing against the peoples of eastern Europe wanting to get on, but we simply cannot have an open-door immigration policy. The truth is, we cannot take the numbers. It does not make sense, and if we carry on down this road, I am afraid there is going to be bad blood and bad feeling in many towns and cities across the UK. Then we have the extraordinary role that is being played here by the rapporteur for Bulgaria, one Geoffrey Van Orden. In Chelmsford he is a fierce Eurosceptic, our brave brigadier battling for Britain, the spirit of 1940, we can all sleep well in our beds! But it is not quite the same here in Brussels, is it Geoffrey? In Brussels, you are the Commission’s man. You have done the Commission’s bidding, you have done everything you can to get Bulgaria into the European Union, and it will lead to a mass migration. In fact, you resemble Alec Guinness in the film doing completely the wrong thing for what you think is the right reason. I just hope that everybody that voted Conservative in eastern England – especially those that are about to lose their jobs – knows what you and your party have done in this place."@sl¹⁹ "Herr talman! Det råder en viss förutbestämdhet i debatten idag och omröstningen imorgon; när allt kommer omkring vill EU bli en stormakt, så i diskussionerna menar man att ju större desto bättre, och att det finns en trevlig, mysig samstämmighet här i plenisalen. Nåväl, inte vad oss beträffar i alla fall! År 2004 var UKIP (UK Independence Party) det enda brittiska parti som röstade mot utvidgningen av EU och som menade att fri rörlighet för varor och tjänster är en sak, men att fri rörlighet för människor mellan länder med stora skillnader i BNP inte är något annat än fullständigt oansvarigt. Vi förutspådde en omfattande invandring, och fastän man då fördömde oss har vi fått rätt. Det finns mer än en halv miljon människor i Storbritannien som är arbetssökande, men ingen tvivlar på att den egentliga siffran är betydligt närmare en miljon. Och detta kostar en väldans massa pengar. Vi har redan 55 000 människor som åberopar någon form av statsunderstöd. Arbetslösheten i Storbritannien har ökat med mer än en kvarts miljon det senaste året. Vi har ett mycket stort överskott på okvalificerad arbetskraft. Till och med OECD sa igår att utvidgningen av EU hade stått Storbritannien dyrt. Och vad är vår lösning på allt detta? Att släppa in två länder som är ännu fattigare än de som gick med för två år sedan, vilket oundvikligen i procenttal räknat kommer att göra att invandringen ökar ännu mer! Jag vet att alla förnekar detta. Vi har haft Bulgariens premiärminister här och Rumäniens premiärminister här och de talar alla om för oss att detta inte kommer att hända, att det inte kommer att ske någon stor förflyttning av människor, men det kommer det naturligtvis att göra. Det finns ett mycket bättre sätt att göra detta på. Vi borde ha ett ordentligt system för arbetstillstånd som grundar sig på förfrågningar, särskilt för kvalificerade arbetstagare. Vi har inget emot att människor i Östeuropa vill komma vidare, men vi kan helt enkelt inte ha en helt öppen invandringspolitik. Sanningen är att vi klarar inte av mängden invandrare. Detta är inte förnuftigt, och om vi fortsätter att följa denna linje tror jag tyvärr att det kommer att väcka ont blod och osämja i många både mindre och större städer i Storbritannien. Sedan har vi den alldeles speciella roll som föredraganden för Bulgarien har, nämligen Geoffrey Van Orden. I Chelmsford är han våldsamt skeptisk mot EU, vår modige brigadgeneral som strider för Storbritannien på ett sätt som andas fyrtiotal, och vi kan alla sova gott om natten! Men det är inte riktigt samma sak här i Bryssel, eller hur Geoffrey? I Bryssel är ni kommissionens man. Ni har lytt kommissionen, ni har gjort allt ni kunnat för att få in Bulgarien i EU, och detta kommer att leda till massinvandring. Uppriktigt talat liknar ni Alec Guinness i filmen eftersom ni gör helt fel saker av skäl som ni tror är goda. Jag hoppas bara att alla som röstade för de konservativa i östra England – särskilt de som håller på att förlora sina arbeten – vet vad ni och ert parti har gjort här."@sv²¹
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata	""A ponte sobre o Rio Kwai""¹⁷ "(Aplausos del Grupo IND/DEM)"²⁰ "(Aplausos do Grupo IND/DEM)"¹⁷ "(Applaudissements du groupe IND/DEM)"^8,8 "(Applaus van de IND/DEM-Fractie)"³ "(Applause from the IND/DEM Group)"^{5,19,15,1,18,14,11,16,13,4} "(Applausi dal gruppo IND/DEM)"¹² "(Applåder från IND/DEM-gruppen)"²¹ "(Beifall von der IND/DEM-Fraktion)"⁹ "(Bifald fra IND/DEM-Gruppen)"² "(Suosionosoituksia IND/DEM-ryhmästä.)"⁷ "(Χειροκροτήματα από την Ομάδα Ανεξαρτησία και Δημοκρατία)"¹⁰ "Broen over floden Kwai"² "Bron över floden Kwai,"²¹ "El puente sobre el río Kwai"²⁰ "Il ponte sul fiume Kwai"¹² "Kwai-joen silta"⁷ "Le pont de la rivière Kwaï"⁸ "Nigel Farage,"^{5,19,15,1,18,14,16,11,13,4} "The Bridge on the River Kwai"^{5,19,15,1,18,14,16,11,3,13,4} "on behalf of the IND/DEM Group"^{5,19,15,1,18,14,16,11,13,4} "Η γέφυρα του ποταμού Κβάι"¹⁰