Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-12-13-Speech-3-318"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20061213.33.3-318"6
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
".
Mr President, observers will be delighted to hear that the Presidency-in-Office is cutting down the length of the Council conclusions. I understand that the current draft is about 20 pages, at least in French, compared with the normal 60. They may not be so pleased to hear from Mr Poettering that the European People’s Party is meeting tomorrow to prepare the summit. They are so divided over issues like Turkey that, when they prepare the summit, things never get better! In fact, I understand that the Council Secretariat is preparing a letter saying, ‘please, if things don’t get better soon, we may have to ask you to stop helping us!’
I would like to address three issues that are on the agenda for the summit: enlargement, energy and migration. The Council will discuss enlargement and, no doubt, integration capacity. Perhaps they will find an agreement on where Europe ends, but I suspect that Jean Monnet might have been right when, addressing the predecessor to this assembly, the Common Assembly of the European Coal and Steel Community in 1955, he spoke of a ‘broader united Europe whose bounds are set only by those who have not yet joined’. As the Chinese would put it rather more prosaically, ‘the people who decide when the bus is full are those on the outside’.
It is important to discuss Turkey and I praise the Commission, and particularly the work of Commissioner Rehn, in taking action and making a firm proposal before there was time for an anarchy of reaction from national capitals; a firm proposal that was supported by the foreign ministers and, I hope, will be taken up by the Council. But let us then recognise that before we talk any more about enlargement, we are going to have to get our own constitutional arrangements sorted out, because the European people will not want us to enlarge further without a clear basis for the further development of our Union. It is not going to do any good to think we can rewrite the Nice Treaty for Croatia. Let us get the Constitution sorted first.
On energy, the great worry of my group, President-in-Office, is that the European Union is in danger of being held hostage. Held hostage to producers, whether they be in Russia or in North Africa or in Central Asia – or perhaps even in Latin America – in the case of biofuels. What we urgently need to do in Europe is to cut consumption by motor vehicles and electrical equipment; cut consumption of heating through better design of buildings; cut the consumption of electronic equipment; and increase production of safe, sustainable energy sources – biomass, as proposed by the Commission, and renewables, perhaps through research by moving to a hydrogen economy or looking into nuclear fusion.
We need to liberalise markets, because one of the reasons we do not have a proper energy policy in Europe is that we do not have a proper liberalisation of the market. I am pleased that even the Social Democrats, meeting in Oporto last week, have finally recognised that competition is going to be important for future development.
On migration, the Commission and the Council are concentrating too much on the security aspects, not enough on the economic or humanitarian aspects. You cannot talk of ‘effective management’ of migration, of ‘reinforcing’ FRONTEX and so on, without recognising the human tragedy unfolding on our southern shores because people know they will find jobs here in Europe. The President said this was a long-term challenge – yes, but for five years the Council has done nothing about it, and we must make progress.
Finally, if the Council does come to discuss the site for Galileo – I understand that Prague, Valetta and Ljubljana all want it – why do they not follow the example of this wonderful institution and have a three-site operation? At least those looking at the site for Galileo would be able to say
!"@en4
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, observers will be delighted to hear that the Presidency-in-Office is cutting down the length of the Council conclusions. I understand that the current draft is about 20 pages, at least in French, compared with the normal 60. They may not be so pleased to hear from Mr Poettering that the European People’s Party is meeting tomorrow to prepare the summit. They are so divided over issues like Turkey that, when they prepare the summit, things never get better! In fact, I understand that the Council Secretariat is preparing a letter saying, ‘please, if things don’t get better soon, we may have to ask you to stop helping us!’
I would like to address three issues that are on the agenda for the summit: enlargement, energy and migration. The Council will discuss enlargement and, no doubt, integration capacity. Perhaps they will find an agreement on where Europe ends, but I suspect that Jean Monnet might have been right when, addressing the predecessor to this assembly, the Common Assembly of the European Coal and Steel Community in 1955, he spoke of a ‘broader united Europe whose bounds are set only by those who have not yet joined’. As the Chinese would put it rather more prosaically, ‘the people who decide when the bus is full are those on the outside’.
It is important to discuss Turkey and I praise the Commission, and particularly the work of Commissioner Rehn, in taking action and making a firm proposal before there was time for an anarchy of reaction from national capitals; a firm proposal that was supported by the foreign ministers and, I hope, will be taken up by the Council. But let us then recognise that before we talk any more about enlargement, we are going to have to get our own constitutional arrangements sorted out, because the European people will not want us to enlarge further without a clear basis for the further development of our Union. It is not going to do any good to think we can rewrite the Nice Treaty for Croatia. Let us get the Constitution sorted first.
On energy, the great worry of my group, President-in-Office, is that the European Union is in danger of being held hostage. Held hostage to producers, whether they be in Russia or in North Africa or in Central Asia – or perhaps even in Latin America – in the case of biofuels. What we urgently need to do in Europe is to cut consumption by motor vehicles and electrical equipment; cut consumption of heating through better design of buildings; cut the consumption of electronic equipment; and increase production of safe, sustainable energy sources – biomass, as proposed by the Commission, and renewables, perhaps through research by moving to a hydrogen economy or looking into nuclear fusion.
We need to liberalise markets, because one of the reasons we do not have a proper energy policy in Europe is that we do not have a proper liberalisation of the market. I am pleased that even the Social Democrats, meeting in Oporto last week, have finally recognised that competition is going to be important for future development.
On migration, the Commission and the Council are concentrating too much on the security aspects, not enough on the economic or humanitarian aspects. You cannot talk of ‘effective management’ of migration, of ‘reinforcing’ FRONTEX and so on, without recognising the human tragedy unfolding on our southern shores because people know they will find jobs here in Europe. The President said this was a long-term challenge – yes, but for five years the Council has done nothing about it, and we must make progress.
Finally, if the Council does come to discuss the site for Galileo – I understand that Prague, Valetta and Ljubljana all want it – why do they not follow the example of this wonderful institution and have a three-site operation? At least those looking at the site for Galileo would be able to say
!"@cs1
"Hr. formand! Iagttagere vil blive begejstrede for at høre, at rådsformandskabet vil skære ned på længden af Rådets konklusioner. Jeg kan forstå, at det nuværende udkast er på omkring 20 sider, i det mindste på fransk, sammenlignet med de normale 60. De er måske ikke så begejstrede for at høre fra hr. Poettering, at Det Europæisk Folkeparti mødes i morgen for at forberede topmødet. De står så splittet over spørgsmål som Tyrkiet, at tingene aldrig bliver bedre, når de forbereder sig på topmødet! Jeg har faktisk forstået, at Rådets sekretariat er ved at udarbejde en skrivelse, hvor der står: "Hvis det ikke snart bliver bedre, kan vi blive nødt til at bede Dem holde op med at hjælpe os!"
Jeg vil gerne tage tre spørgsmål op, som er på dagsordenen for topmødet: udvidelsen, energi og indvandring. Rådet vil drøfte udvidelsen og uden tvivl også integrationskapaciteten. Måske når de frem til en aftale om, hvor Europa slutter, men jeg har en formodning om, at Jean Monnet måske havde ret, da han talte til forgængeren for denne forsamling, Den Fælles Forsamling for Det Europæiske Kul- og Stålfællesskab, i 1995, hvor han talte om et "bredere, forenet Europa, hvis grænser kun fastsættes af dem, der endnu ikke har tilsluttet sig". Som kineserne ville formulere det noget mere prosaisk: "Det er dem, der står udenfor, der afgør, hvornår bussen er fuld".
Det er vigtigt at drøfte Tyrkiet, og jeg vil rose Kommissionen, og navnlig kommissær Rehns arbejde, fordi den er skredet til handling og har fremsat et konkret forslag, før der blev tid til et anarki af reaktioner fra de forskellige hovedstæder; et konkret forslag, der fandt støtte fra udenrigsministrene, og som forhåbentlig vil blive taget op af Rådet. Men så må vi erkende, at før vi snakker mere om udvidelsen, skal vi have styr på vores egne forfatningsbestemmelser, for den europæiske befolkning ønsker ikke, at vi udvider mere uden et entydigt grundlag for Unionens fortsatte udvikling. Det vil ikke nytte noget at tro, at vi kan omskrive Nice-traktaten i forbindelse med Kroatien. Lad os få forfatningsspørgsmålet løst først.
På energiområdet er min gruppe, fru rådsformand, meget bekymret over, at Den Europæiske Union er i fare for at blive taget som gidsel. Gidsel hos producenterne, uanset om de befinder sig i Rusland eller i Nordafrika eller i Centralasien - eller måske endda i Latinamerika - i forbindelse med biobrændsel. Det, vi har brug for her i Europa, er hurtigst mulig at begrænse forbruget i motorkøretøjer og elektrisk udstyr; begrænse varmeforbruget gennem en bedre udformning af bygningerne; begrænse forbruget i elektronisk udstyr og øge produktionen af sikre, vedvarende energikilder - biomasse som foreslået af Kommissionen, og vedvarende energi, måske gennem forskning ved at gå over til en brintbaseret økonomi eller forske i fusionsenergi.
Vi må liberalisere markederne, fordi en af grundene til, at vi ikke har nogen egentlig energipolitik i Europa er, at vi ikke har en ordentlig liberalisering af markedet. Det glæder mig, at selv Socialdemokraterne på deres møde i Oporto i sidste uge endelig har erkendt, at konkurrencen vil få stor betydning for den fremtidige udvikling.
På immigrationsområdet koncentrerer Kommissionen og Rådet sig for meget om sikkerhedsaspekterne og ikke nok om de økonomiske og humanitære aspekter. Man kan ikke tale om "effektiv forvaltning" af indvandringen eller en "styrkelse" af FRONTEX osv. uden at anerkende den menneskelige tragedie, der udfolder sig på vores sydlige kyster, fordi mennesker ved, at de vil kunne finde arbejde her i Europa. Formanden sagde, at dette var en langsigtet udfordring - ja, men i fem år har Rådet intet gjort ved det, og vi er nødt til at gøre fremskridt.
Hvis Rådet endelig skal drøfte hjemstedet for Galileo - jeg forstår, at Prag, Valletta og Ljubljana alle ønsker at få det - hvorfor følger man så ikke eksemplet med denne fantastiske institution og giver det tre arbejdssteder? Så vil de, der ser på hjemstedet for Galileo i det mindste kunne sige
!"@da2
".
Herr Präsident! Die Beobachter werden mit Freude vernehmen, dass der Ratsvorsitz seine Schlussfolgerungen kürzen wird. Soviel ich weiß, umfasst der derzeitige Entwurf rund 20 Seiten, zumindest in der französischen Fassung, und nicht mehr 60 wie sonst üblich. Die Beobachter werden nicht mehr ganz so erfreut sein, wenn sie von Herrn Pöttering hören, dass die Europäische Volkspartei sich morgen zur Vorbereitung des Gipfels trifft. Bei Themen wie der Türkei sind ihre Mitglieder so verschiedener Auffassung, dass es, wenn sie den Gipfel vorbereiten, nie besser werden kann! Soviel ich weiß, arbeitet das Ratssekretariat sogar ein Schreiben aus, in dem es heißt: „Bitte, bitte, wenn es nicht bald besser wird, sind wir unter Umständen gezwungen, Sie zu bitten, uns nicht mehr zu helfen!“
Ich möchte gerne drei Themen ansprechen, die auf der Tagesordnung des Gipfels stehen: Erweiterung, Energie und Migration. Der Rat wird sich mit der Erweiterung und, daran besteht kein Zweifel, mit der Integrationsfähigkeit befassen. Vielleicht findet er eine Einigung über die Grenzen Europas, aber ich vermute, dass Jean Monnet Recht hatte, als er 1955 zum Vorgänger dieser Versammlung, der Gemeinsamen Versammlung der Europäischen Gemeinschaft für Kohle und Stahl, sinngemäß von einem größeren, geeinten Europa sprach, dessen Schranken nur diejenigen aufstellen, die noch nicht beigetreten sind. Die Chinesen würden es prosaischer ausdrücken: „Die, die entscheiden, wann der Bus voll ist, sind diejenigen, die draußen bleiben.“
Es ist wichtig, das Thema Türkei zu diskutieren, und ich lobe die Kommission und vor allem die Arbeit von Kommissar Rehn, da Maßnahmen ergriffen und ein klarer Vorschlag ausgearbeitet wurde, bevor Zeit für eine Anarchie der Reaktion der einzelnen Hauptstädte war; ein klarer Vorschlag, der von den Außenministern unterstützt wurde und hoffentlich vom Rat aufgegriffen wird. Aber wir müssen zugeben, dass wir, bevor wir uns weiter über die Erweiterung unterhalten, unsere eigenen konstitutionellen Regelungen auf die Reihe bekommen müssen, weil die Bevölkerung Europas nicht will, dass wir ohne eine eindeutige Grundlage für die weitere Entwicklung unserer Union die nächste Erweiterungsrunde einläuten. Es wird uns nicht gut tun, zu denken, dass wir den Vertrag von Nizza für Kroatien umschreiben können. Wir müssen erst eine Lösung für die Verfassung finden.
Was die Energie angeht, besteht die große Sorge meiner Fraktion darin, Frau Ratspräsidentin, dass die Europäische Union Gefahr läuft, zur Geisel genommen zu werden. Geisel der Erzeuger, sei es in Russland oder Nordafrika oder Zentralasien – oder sogar in Lateinamerika –, die Biokraftstoffe herstellen. Was wir in Europa dringend erreichen müssen, ist ein geringerer Energieverbrauch von Kraftfahrzeugen und elektrischen Geräten, von Heizungen – durch bessere Gebäudestrukturen – und von elektronischen Geräten sowie eine Steigerung der Produktion sicherer, nachhaltiger Energiequellen – Biomasse, wie von der Kommission vorgeschlagen – und erneuerbarer Energiequellen, vielleicht durch die Forschung, indem wir zur Wasserstoffwirtschaft übergehen oder uns mit der Kernfusion beschäftigen.
Wir müssen die Märkte liberalisieren, da einer der Gründe, warum wir in Europa keine richtige Energiepolitik haben, darin besteht, dass wir keine richtige Liberalisierung des Marktes haben. Es freut mich sehr, dass sogar die Sozialdemokraten bei ihrem Treffen in Oporto in der letzten Woche endlich erkannt haben, dass Wettbewerb für die künftige Entwicklung wichtig sein wird.
Was die Migration betrifft, konzentrieren sich Kommission und Rat zu sehr auf die sicherheitspolitischen und nicht genug auf die wirtschaftlichen oder humanitären Aspekte. Man kann nicht von einem „effektiven Management“ der Migration, von der „Stärkung“ von FRONTEX usw. sprechen, ohne die menschliche Tragödie zu begreifen, die sich an den Küsten unseres Südens ereignet, weil die Menschen wissen, dass sie hier in Europa Arbeit finden. Der Präsident sagte, dass dies eine langfristige Aufgabe sei – ja, aber fünf Jahre lang hat der Rat nichts unternommen, und wir müssen jetzt Fortschritte erzielen.
Abschließend sei angemerkt, warum der Rat, wenn er den Standort für die Galileo-Aufsichtsbehörde erörtert – ich kann gut verstehen, dass Prag, Valetta und Ljubljana sie alle wollen –, nicht dem Beispiel dieser wunderbaren Einrichtung folgt und allen drei Städten den Zuschlag erteilt? Zumindest diejenigen, die ihn sich ansehen, könnten sagen „
!“ – und sie bewegt sich doch!"@de9
".
Κύριε Πρόεδρε, οι παρατηρητές θα χαρούν αν πληροφορηθούν ότι η Προεδρία μειώνει την έκταση των συμπερασμάτων του Συμβουλίου. Πληροφορούμαι ότι η έκταση του σχεδίου είναι τώρα 20 σελίδες περίπου, τουλάχιστον στα γαλλικά, αντί των συνήθων 60 σελίδων. Μπορεί να μην αισθάνονται την ίδια ευχαρίστηση ακούγοντας από τον κ. Poettering ότι το Ευρωπαϊκό Λαϊκό Κόμμα συνεδριάζει αύριο προκειμένου να προετοιμαστεί για τη διάσκεψη κορυφής. Είναι τόσο διχασμένοι για θέματα όπως η Τουρκία ώστε, όταν προετοιμάζουν τη διάσκεψη κορυφής, τα πράγματα δεν εξελίσσονται ποτέ προς το καλύτερο! Πληροφορούμαι μάλιστα ότι η γραμματεία του Συμβουλίου ετοιμάζει μια επιστολή στην οποία θα αναφέρεται: «σας παρακαλούμε, αν τα πράγματα δεν βελτιωθούν σύντομα, μπορεί να χρειαστεί να σας ζητήσουμε να σταματήσετε να μας βοηθάτε!»
Θέλω να αναφερθώ σε τρία θέματα τα οποία περιλαμβάνονται στην ημερήσια διάταξη της διάσκεψης κορυφής: διεύρυνση, ενέργεια και μετανάστευση. Το Συμβούλιο θα συζητήσει σχετικά με τη διεύρυνση και, αναμφίβολα, την ικανότητα ένταξης. Ενδεχομένως να καταλήξουν σε συμφωνία σχετικά με το ποια είναι τα όρια της Ευρώπης, αλλά υποπτεύομαι ότι ο Jean Monnet μπορεί να είχε δίκιο όταν, απευθυνόμενος το 1955 στην Κοινή Συνέλευση της Ευρωπαϊκής Κοινότητας Άνθρακα και Χάλυβα, τη συνέλευση που προηγήθηκε της δημιουργίας του ΕΚ, έκανε λόγο για μια «ευρύτερη ενωμένη Ευρώπη τα όρια της οποίας ορίζονται μόνον από όσους δεν έχουν ακόμη ενταχθεί». Όπως θα έλεγαν οι Κινέζοι, κάπως πιο πεζά: «εκείνοι που αποφασίζουν πότε έχει γεμίσει το λεωφορείο είναι όσοι βρίσκονται απ’ έξω».
Είναι σημαντικό να συζητήσουμε το θέμα της Τουρκίας, και επαινώ την Επιτροπή, και ιδίως τον Επίτροπο Rehn, διότι ανέλαβε την πρωτοβουλία να καταθέσει μια αυστηρή πρόταση προτού αρχίσουν να εκδηλώνονται άναρχες αντιδράσεις από τις εθνικές πρωτεύουσες· μια αυστηρή πρόταση η οποία υποστηρίχθηκε από τους υπουργούς Εξωτερικών και, ελπίζω, θα ακολουθηθεί από το Συμβούλιο. Πρέπει, όμως, τότε να αναγνωρίσουμε ότι, προτού συζητήσουμε ξανά για το θέμα της διεύρυνσης, οφείλουμε να διευθετήσουμε την κατάσταση όσον αφορά το συνταγματικό πλαίσιο, διότι ο ευρωπαϊκός λαός δεν θα θέλει να διευρυνθούμε περισσότερο χωρίς μια σαφή βάση για την περαιτέρω ανάπτυξη της Ένωσής μας. Δεν ωφελεί να θεωρήσουμε ότι μπορούμε να ξαναγράψουμε τη Συνθήκη της Νίκαιας για την Κροατία. Ας διευθετήσουμε πρώτα το θέμα του Συντάγματος.
Ως προς το θέμα της ενέργειας, εκείνο που ανησυχεί κυρίως την Ομάδα μου, κυρία Προεδρεύουσα του Συμβουλίου, είναι ότι η Ευρωπαϊκή Ένωση κινδυνεύει να τεθεί υπό καθεστώς ομηρίας. Κινδυνεύει να μετατραπεί σε όμηρο των παραγωγών, είτε βρίσκονται στη Ρωσία, είτε στη Βόρεια Αφρική ή την Κεντρική Ασία –ίσως ακόμη και στη Λατινική Αμερική– στον τομέα των βιοκαυσίμων. Αυτό που πρέπει επειγόντως να πράξουμε στην Ευρώπη είναι να μειώσουμε την κατανάλωση ενέργειας των οχημάτων και του ηλεκτρικού εξοπλισμού· να μειώσουμε την κατανάλωση ενέργειας για θέρμανση μέσω του καλύτερου σχεδιασμού των κτηρίων· να μειώσουμε την κατανάλωση ενέργειας του ηλεκτρονικού εξοπλισμού· και να αυξήσουμε την παραγωγή ασφαλών, βιώσιμων πηγών ενέργειας – βιομάζας, όπως προτείνει η Επιτροπή, και ανανεώσιμων πηγών ενέργειας, ίσως μέσω της έρευνας για τη μετάβαση σε μια οικονομία υδρογόνου ή εξετάζοντας τις δυνατότητες της πυρηνικής σύντηξης.
Πρέπει να ελευθερώσουμε τις αγορές, διότι ένας από τους λόγους για τους οποίους δεν διαθέτουμε κατάλληλη ενεργειακή πολιτική στην Ευρώπη είναι το γεγονός ότι η αγορά δεν έχει ελευθερωθεί όπως πρέπει. Χαίρομαι διότι ακόμα και οι Σοσιαλδημοκράτες, στη διάσκεψή τους στο Οπόρτο την περασμένη εβδομάδα, αναγνώρισαν επιτέλους ότι ο ανταγωνισμός θα είναι σημαντικός για τη μελλοντική ανάπτυξη.
Όσον αφορά τη μετανάστευση, η Επιτροπή και το Συμβούλιο εστιάζουν την προσοχή τους υπερβολικά στις πτυχές της ασφάλειας και ανεπαρκώς στις οικονομικές ή ανθρωπιστικές πτυχές. Δεν μπορείτε να μιλάτε για «αποτελεσματική διαχείριση» της μετανάστευσης, για «ενίσχυση» του Οργανισμού Διαχείρισης Εξωτερικών Συνόρων κ.ο.κ., χωρίς να αναγνωρίζετε την ανθρώπινη τραγωδία που εκτυλίσσεται στις νότιες ακτές μας επειδή οι άνθρωποι αυτοί πιστεύουν ότι θα βρουν δουλειά εδώ στην Ευρώπη. Ο κ. Πρόεδρος ανέφερε ότι πρόκειται για μακροπρόθεσμη πρόκληση – ναι, αλλά επί πέντε χρόνια το Συμβούλιο δεν έχει κάνει τίποτε για αυτό το θέμα, και πρέπει να σημειώσουμε πρόοδο.
Τέλος, εάν το Συμβούλιο θελήσει να συζητήσει το θέμα της έδρας του Galileo –εξ όσων γνωρίζω, την διεκδικούν εξίσου η Πράγα, η Βαλέτα και η Λιουμπλιάνα– γιατί δεν ακολουθούν το παράδειγμα αυτού εδώ του θαυμάσιου θεσμικού οργάνου και να δημιουργήσουν έδρες και στις τρεις πόλεις; Τουλάχιστον όσοι θα βλέπουν την έδρα του Galileo θα μπορούν να αναφωνήσουν
!"@el10
"Señor Presidente, los observadores se alegrarán de oír que la Presidencia en ejercicio quiere que las conclusiones del Consejo sean menos largas. Tengo entendido que el proyecto actual tiene unas 20 páginas, al menos en francés, frente a las 60 que tiene normalmente. Pero quizá no se alegren tanto al oír decir al señor Poettering que el Partido Popular Europeo se reúne mañana para preparar el la cumbre. Están tan divididos sobre temas como el de Turquía que cuando preparen el Consejo Europeo, las cosas no podrán mejorar. De hecho, según tengo entendido, la Secretaría del Consejo está redactando una carta en la que dice: «Por favor, si las cosas no mejoran pronto, tendremos que pedirles que dejen de ayudarnos».
Me gustaría abordar tres temas que figuran en el orden del día de la reunión: la ampliación, la energía y la migración. El Consejo deliberará sobre la ampliación y, sin duda, sobre la capacidad de integración. Quizás lleguen a un acuerdo sobre dónde acaba Europa, pero me temo que Jean Monnet tenía razón cuando habló ante la Asamblea Común de la Comunidad Europea del Carbón y del Acero en 1955 sobre «una Europa unida más vasta cuyos límites sean establecidos únicamente por los que aún no pertenecen a ella». Los chinos lo dirían de forma más prosaica con estas palabras: «los que deciden cuándo el autobús está lleno son los que están fuera».
Es importante hablar de Turquía y felicito a la Comisión y, en particular, los trabajos del Comisario Rehn, por tomar medidas y presentar una propuesta firme antes de que se produjeran reacciones anárquicas en las capitales nacionales; una propuesta firme que fue respaldada por los Ministros de Asuntos Exteriores y que espero el Consejo haga suya. Pero tenemos que reconocer que antes de hablar de ampliación, vamos a tener que resolver nuestros problemas constitucionales, porque los europeos no desean una nueva ampliación sin un fundamento claro para el desarrollo futuro de nuestra Unión. Pensar que podemos modificar el Tratado de Niza para Croacia no traerá nada bueno. Primero debemos resolver la cuestión de la Constitución.
En cuanto a la energía, lo que más preocupa a nuestro Grupo, señora Presidenta en ejercicio, es que la Unión Europea corre peligro de convertirse en rehén. Rehén de los productores, ya sean los de Rusia o África del Norte o Asia Central –quizás incluso de América Latina– en el caso de los biocarburantes. Lo que tenemos que hacer en Europa con toda urgencia es reducir el consumo de los vehículos de motor y de los equipos eléctricos; reducir el consumo de calefacción mediante un mejor diseño de los edificios; reducir el consumo de los equipos eléctricos y aumentar la producción de fuentes de energía seguras y sostenibles –biomasa, como propone la Comisión, y fuentes renovables, a través de la investigación que nos permita pasar a una economía del hidrógeno o estudiar la fusión nuclear.
Debemos liberalizar los mercados, porque una de las razones por las que carecemos de una política energética adecuada en Europa es que no hemos llevado a cabo una liberalización del mercado como es debido. Me alegro de que incluso los socialdemócratas hayan reconocido por fin, en su reunión de Oporto de la semana pasada, que la competencia es importante para el desarrollo futuro.
Por lo que respecta a la migración, la Comisión y el Consejo se concentran demasiado en los aspectos de seguridad y no lo suficiente en los aspectos económicos o humanitarios. No podemos hablar de «gestión eficaz» de la migración, de «reforzar» FRONTEX, etc., si no reconocemos la tragedia humana que se desarrolla en nuestras costas meridionales, porque la gente sabe que encontrarán empleo aquí en Europa. La Presidenta ha dicho que se trata de un problema a largo plazo; sí, pero el Consejo no ha hecho nada al respecto y tenemos que avanzar en esta cuestión.
Por último, si el Consejo llega a debatir la sede de Galileo –que, según entiendo, se disputan Praga, Valetta y Liubliana–, ¿por qué no seguimos el ejemplo de nuestra maravillosa institución y designamos tres sedes? Al menos, quienes buscan la sede para Galileo podrían decir
!"@es20
"Mr President, observers will be delighted to hear that the Presidency-in-Office is cutting down the length of the Council conclusions. I understand that the current draft is about 20 pages, at least in French, compared with the normal 60. They may not be so pleased to hear from Mr Poettering that the European People’s Party is meeting tomorrow to prepare the summit. They are so divided over issues like Turkey that, when they prepare the summit, things never get better! In fact, I understand that the Council Secretariat is preparing a letter saying, ‘please, if things don’t get better soon, we may have to ask you to stop helping us!’
I would like to address three issues that are on the agenda for the summit: enlargement, energy and migration. The Council will discuss enlargement and, no doubt, integration capacity. Perhaps they will find an agreement on where Europe ends, but I suspect that Jean Monnet might have been right when, addressing the predecessor to this assembly, the Common Assembly of the European Coal and Steel Community in 1955, he spoke of a ‘broader united Europe whose bounds are set only by those who have not yet joined’. As the Chinese would put it rather more prosaically, ‘the people who decide when the bus is full are those on the outside’.
It is important to discuss Turkey and I praise the Commission, and particularly the work of Commissioner Rehn, in taking action and making a firm proposal before there was time for an anarchy of reaction from national capitals; a firm proposal that was supported by the foreign ministers and, I hope, will be taken up by the Council. But let us then recognise that before we talk any more about enlargement, we are going to have to get our own constitutional arrangements sorted out, because the European people will not want us to enlarge further without a clear basis for the further development of our Union. It is not going to do any good to think we can rewrite the Nice Treaty for Croatia. Let us get the Constitution sorted first.
On energy, the great worry of my group, President-in-Office, is that the European Union is in danger of being held hostage. Held hostage to producers, whether they be in Russia or in North Africa or in Central Asia – or perhaps even in Latin America – in the case of biofuels. What we urgently need to do in Europe is to cut consumption by motor vehicles and electrical equipment; cut consumption of heating through better design of buildings; cut the consumption of electronic equipment; and increase production of safe, sustainable energy sources – biomass, as proposed by the Commission, and renewables, perhaps through research by moving to a hydrogen economy or looking into nuclear fusion.
We need to liberalise markets, because one of the reasons we do not have a proper energy policy in Europe is that we do not have a proper liberalisation of the market. I am pleased that even the Social Democrats, meeting in Oporto last week, have finally recognised that competition is going to be important for future development.
On migration, the Commission and the Council are concentrating too much on the security aspects, not enough on the economic or humanitarian aspects. You cannot talk of ‘effective management’ of migration, of ‘reinforcing’ FRONTEX and so on, without recognising the human tragedy unfolding on our southern shores because people know they will find jobs here in Europe. The President said this was a long-term challenge – yes, but for five years the Council has done nothing about it, and we must make progress.
Finally, if the Council does come to discuss the site for Galileo – I understand that Prague, Valetta and Ljubljana all want it – why do they not follow the example of this wonderful institution and have a three-site operation? At least those looking at the site for Galileo would be able to say
!"@et5
".
Arvoisa puhemies, tarkkailijat ilahtuvat kuullessaan, että puheenjohtajavaltio on aikeissa lyhentää neuvoston päätelmiä. Tämänhetkinen tekstiluonnos on ainakin ranskaksi ymmärtääkseni noin 20 sivua pitkä, kun tavallisesti se on 60 sivua. Sen sijaan he saattavat ilahtua hieman vähemmän kuullessaan jäsen Poetteringilta, että Euroopan kansanpuolue kokoontuu huomenna valmistellakseen huippukokousta. Euroopan kansanpuolueen jäsenet ovat niin erimielisiä Turkin kaltaisista kysymyksistä, että heidän valmistellessaan huippukokousta asiat eivät muutu yhtään parempaan suuntaan! Itse asiassa neuvoston sihteeristö valmistelee ymmärtääkseni kirjettä, jossa todetaan, että "ellei tilanne parane pikaisesti, saatamme pyytää teitä lopettamaan auttamisemme"!
Haluan puhua kolmesta kysymyksestä, jotka ovat huippukokouksen esityslistalla: laajentumisesta, energiasta ja maahanmuutosta. Neuvosto keskustelee laajentumisesta ja epäilemättä myös EU:n kyvystä ottaa uusia jäseniä. Ehkäpä se pääsee sopimukseen siitä, mihin Eurooppa päättyy. Luulen kuitenkin, että Jean Monnet oli oikeassa puhuessaan vuonna 1955 Euroopan parlamentin edeltäjälle, Euroopan hiili- ja teräsyhteisön yleiskokoukselle, "laajemmasta yhdentyneestä Euroopasta, jonka rajat asettavat vain ne, jotka eivät ole vielä liittyneet siihen". Kiinalaiset esittäisivät asian hieman arkipäiväisemmin seuraavaan tapaan: "ne, jotka päättävät, onko linja-auto täynnä, ovat bussin ulkopuolella".
Turkista on tärkeää käydä keskustelua, ja kiitän komissiota ja erityisesti komission jäsentä Rehniä toimiin ryhtymisestä ja vankan ehdotuksen tekemisestä ennen kuin jäsenvaltioiden hallitusten oli aika reagoida anarkistisesti. Ulkoministerit ovat antaneet tukensa tälle vankalle ehdotukselle, ja toivon neuvoston ottavan sen käsittelyyn. Tunnustetaan kuitenkin, että ennen kuin jatkamme keskusteluja laajentumisesta, meidän on saatava omat perustuslakiasiamme hoidettua, sillä EU:n kansalaiset eivät halua EU:n laajentuvan enempää, ellei unionin tulevalla kehityksellä ole selkeää perustaa. Meidän ei kannata miettiä, voimmeko kirjoittaa Nizzan sopimuksen uusiksi mahdollistaaksemme Kroatian liittymisen. Hoidetaan perustuslakiasia ensin.
Jatkan puhumalla energiasta. Arvoisa neuvoston puheenjohtaja, ryhmäni on hyvin huolissaan siitä, että Euroopan unioni on vaarassa joutua biopolttoaineiden alalla tuottajien panttivangiksi, olivatpa nämä venäläisiä, pohjoisafrikkalaisia tai keskiaasialaisia tai jopa latinalaisamerikkalaisia. Meidän onkin leikattava EU:ssa kiireesti moottoriajoneuvojen ja sähkölaitteiden kulutusta, lämmityksestä johtuvaa kulutusta parantamalla rakennusten suunnittelua, leikattava elektroniikan kulutusta sekä lisättävä turvallisiin ja kestäviin energialähteisiin perustuvaa tuotantoa. Tällaisia lähteitä ovat biomassa, josta komissio on antanut ehdotuksen, sekä uusiutuvat energialähteet. Tämä olisi kenties mahdollista tutkimuksen keinoin ja siirtymällä vetytalouteen tai tarkastelemalla ydinfuusioon liittyviä mahdollisuuksia.
Meidän on vapautettava markkinat, sillä se, ettei meillä ole EU:ssa kunnollista energiapolitiikkaa, johtuu osittain siitä, ettemme ole vapauttaneet markkinoita kunnolla. On mukavaa havaita, että jopa sosiaalidemokraatit, jotka kokoontuivat Portossa viime viikolla, ovat viimeinkin panneet merkille, että kilpailusta tulee tärkeä asia tulevan kehityksen kannalta.
Maahanmuutosta totean, että komissio ja neuvosto keskittyvät liiaksi turvallisuusnäkökohtiin eivätkä riittävästi taloudellisiin tai humanitäärisiin näkökohtiin. Emme voi puhua maahanmuuton "tehokkaasta hallitsemisesta", rajaturvallisuusviraston "vahvistamisesta" tai mistään muustakaan sellaisesta, ellemme pane merkille, millainen inhimillinen tragedia eteläisillä rannoillamme on käynnissä, sillä ihmiset tietävät löytävänsä työtä täältä Euroopasta. Puhemies sanoi tämän olevan pitkän aikavälin haaste. Tämä kyllä pitää paikkansa, mutta neuvosto ei ole tehnyt asialle viiteen vuoteen yhtään mitään, ja meidän on saatava asiassa aikaan edistystä.
Loppuun lisään, että jos neuvosto alkaa keskustella Galileon sijainnista – ymmärtääkseni sitä tavoittelevat Praha, Valetta ja Ljubljana – miksei asiassa otettaisi esimerkkiä tästä ihanasta toimielimestä ja sijoitettaisi toimintaa kolmeen eri paikkaan? Ainakin ne, jotka pohtivat Galileon sijoittamista, voisivat todeta
!"@fi7
"Monsieur le Président, les observateurs seront ravis d’apprendre que la présidence du Conseil est en train de raccourcir les conclusions du Conseil. D’après ce que j’ai compris, le projet actuel fait aux alentours de vingt pages, du moins en ce qui concerne la version française, contre soixante normalement. Par contre, la nouvelle de M. Poettering, à savoir que le parti populaire européen se réunit demain en vue de la préparation du sommet, les enchantera moins. Leur division au sujet notamment de la Turquie est telle qu’aucune amélioration ne pourra être envisagée au moment de préparer le sommet! En fait, j’ai cru comprendre que le Secrétariat du Conseil préparait une lettre disant: «s’il vous plaît, si la situation ne s’améliore pas prochainement, il se peut que nous vous demandions d’arrêter de nous aider!»
Je voudrais me pencher sur trois points qui figurent au programme du sommet: l’élargissement, l’énergie et l’immigration. Le Conseil discutera de l’élargissement et, soyons-en sûrs, de la capacité d’intégration de l’UE. Peut-être parviendront-ils à se mettre d’accord sur les frontières de l’UE, mais j’ai le sentiment que Jean Monnet avait raison lorsque, s’adressant à l’ancêtre de cette Assemblée, l’Assemblée commune de la Communauté européenne du charbon et de l’acier, en 1955, il a parlé d’une Europe unie plus vaste dont les frontières sont établies uniquement par ceux qui n’en font pas encore partie. Comme le diraient les Chinois plutôt platement: «les personnes qui décident lorsque le bus est plein sont celles qui restent à l’extérieur».
Il est important de débattre de la question de la Turquie, et je me félicite des mesures prises par la Commission - en particulier du travail du commissaire Rehn - et de la proposition ferme qu’elle a soumise avant que les capitales des États membres ne réagissent de manière anarchique; proposition soutenue par les ministres des affaires étrangères et qui, je l’espère, sera reprise par le Conseil. Mais dans ce cas, admettons qu’avant de poursuivre la discussion sur l’élargissement, nous allons devoir mettre de l’ordre dans nos propres dispositions constitutionnelles. En effet, les citoyens européens refuseront que nous poursuivions le processus d’élargissement sans base claire pour le développement de notre Union. Penser que nous pouvons réécrire le traité de Nice pour la Croatie revient à faire preuve d’un manque de vision. Mettons-nous tout d’abord d’accord sur la question de la Constitution.
Passons à l’énergie. Mon groupe redoute principalement, Madame la Présidente en exercice du Conseil, que l’Union soit prise en otage. Tenue en otage par les producteurs, qu’il s’agisse de la Russie, des pays d’Afrique du Nord ou d’Asie centrale - voire d’Amérique latine dans le cas des biocarburants. Il est en particulier urgent que l’Union européenne réduise la consommation des véhicules à moteur et des appareils électriques, celle du chauffage en améliorant la conception des bâtiments, ainsi que celle des appareils électroniques, tout en augmentant la production de sources d’énergie sûres et durables, telles que la biomasse, comme l’a proposé la Commission, et les énergies renouvelables, le cas échéant grâce à la recherche, en passant à une économie de l’hydrogène ou en examinant les possibilités de la fusion nucléaire.
Nous devons libéraliser les marchés, car l’une des raisons pour lesquelles l’Europe ne dispose pas de politique énergétique digne de ce nom réside dans l’absence de véritable libéralisation du marché. Je suis ravi de constater que même les sociodémocrates, qui se sont réunis à Oporto la semaine dernière, ont fini par reconnaître que la concurrence jouera un rôle crucial pour l’avenir de l’Europe.
En ce qui concerne l’immigration, la Commission et le Conseil se concentrent trop sur les aspects sécuritaires, et pas suffisamment sur les aspects économiques ou humanitaires. On ne peut pas parler de «gestion efficace» de l’immigration, ou encore de «renforcement» de FRONTEX, etc., sans reconnaître la tragédie humaine qui se déroule sur les rivages du sud de notre continent, les immigrés sachant qu’ils vont trouver un emploi ici en Europe. La présidente a déclaré qu’il s’agissait d’un défi à long terme. Certes, c’est indéniable, mais le Conseil est resté les bras croisés pendant cinq ans. Nous devons nous y atteler dès à présent.
Enfin, si le Conseil en vient à la question du choix d’un site pour Galileo - j’ai cru comprendre que Prague, La Valette et Ljubljana étaient toutes les trois en lice -, pourquoi ne pas suivre l’exemple de cette magnifique institution et ne pas opter pour une répartition entre les trois sites? Au moins, ceux qui examinent cette question pourraient dire
!"@fr8
"Mr President, observers will be delighted to hear that the Presidency-in-Office is cutting down the length of the Council conclusions. I understand that the current draft is about 20 pages, at least in French, compared with the normal 60. They may not be so pleased to hear from Mr Poettering that the European People’s Party is meeting tomorrow to prepare the summit. They are so divided over issues like Turkey that, when they prepare the summit, things never get better! In fact, I understand that the Council Secretariat is preparing a letter saying, ‘please, if things don’t get better soon, we may have to ask you to stop helping us!’
I would like to address three issues that are on the agenda for the summit: enlargement, energy and migration. The Council will discuss enlargement and, no doubt, integration capacity. Perhaps they will find an agreement on where Europe ends, but I suspect that Jean Monnet might have been right when, addressing the predecessor to this assembly, the Common Assembly of the European Coal and Steel Community in 1955, he spoke of a ‘broader united Europe whose bounds are set only by those who have not yet joined’. As the Chinese would put it rather more prosaically, ‘the people who decide when the bus is full are those on the outside’.
It is important to discuss Turkey and I praise the Commission, and particularly the work of Commissioner Rehn, in taking action and making a firm proposal before there was time for an anarchy of reaction from national capitals; a firm proposal that was supported by the foreign ministers and, I hope, will be taken up by the Council. But let us then recognise that before we talk any more about enlargement, we are going to have to get our own constitutional arrangements sorted out, because the European people will not want us to enlarge further without a clear basis for the further development of our Union. It is not going to do any good to think we can rewrite the Nice Treaty for Croatia. Let us get the Constitution sorted first.
On energy, the great worry of my group, President-in-Office, is that the European Union is in danger of being held hostage. Held hostage to producers, whether they be in Russia or in North Africa or in Central Asia – or perhaps even in Latin America – in the case of biofuels. What we urgently need to do in Europe is to cut consumption by motor vehicles and electrical equipment; cut consumption of heating through better design of buildings; cut the consumption of electronic equipment; and increase production of safe, sustainable energy sources – biomass, as proposed by the Commission, and renewables, perhaps through research by moving to a hydrogen economy or looking into nuclear fusion.
We need to liberalise markets, because one of the reasons we do not have a proper energy policy in Europe is that we do not have a proper liberalisation of the market. I am pleased that even the Social Democrats, meeting in Oporto last week, have finally recognised that competition is going to be important for future development.
On migration, the Commission and the Council are concentrating too much on the security aspects, not enough on the economic or humanitarian aspects. You cannot talk of ‘effective management’ of migration, of ‘reinforcing’ FRONTEX and so on, without recognising the human tragedy unfolding on our southern shores because people know they will find jobs here in Europe. The President said this was a long-term challenge – yes, but for five years the Council has done nothing about it, and we must make progress.
Finally, if the Council does come to discuss the site for Galileo – I understand that Prague, Valetta and Ljubljana all want it – why do they not follow the example of this wonderful institution and have a three-site operation? At least those looking at the site for Galileo would be able to say
!"@hu11
"Signor Presidente, gli osservatori saranno lieti di sentire che la Presidenza sta abbreviando le conclusioni del Consiglio. A quanto ho compreso, l’attuale bozza è di circa 20 pagine, almeno in francese, invece delle normali 60. Potrebbe non far loro altrettanto piacere sapere dall’onorevole Poettering che il Partito popolare europeo domani si riunirà in preparazione del Vertice. Sono talmente divisi in merito a questioni quali la Turchia che, quando si preparano a un Vertice, le cose non migliorano mai! In effetti, mi pare di capire che il segretariato del Consiglio sta predisponendo una lettera in cui dice: “Per favore, se le cose non migliorano in fretta, forse dovremo chiedervi di smettere di aiutarci!”
Vorrei affrontare tre questioni che fanno parte del programma del Vertice: allargamento, energia e migrazione. Il Consiglio discuterà dell’allargamento e, senza dubbio, della capacità d’integrazione. Forse si troverà un accordo su dove finisce l’Europa, ma sospetto che Jean Monnet avesse ragione quando, rivolgendosi nel 1955 ai nostri predecessori, cioè all’Assemblea comune della Comunità europea del carbone e dell’acciaio, ha parlato di “un’Europa unita più ampia i cui confini sono dati solo da coloro che non vi hanno ancora aderito”. Come direbbero i cinesi, in modo molto più prosastico, “a decidere se l’autobus è pieno sono quelli che stanno fuori”.
E’ importante discutere della Turchia e alla Commissione va il mio elogio, in particolare al lavoro del Commissario Rehn, per aver preso l’iniziativa e presentato una proposta decisa prima che vi fosse tempo per una reazione anarchica da parte delle capitali nazionali, una proposta decisa che ha ricevuto il sostegno dei ministri degli Esteri e, mi auguro, verrà accolta dal Consiglio. Riconosciamo tuttavia che prima di riprendere a parlare di allargamento, dovremo risolvere la questione dei nostri accordi costituzionali, perché i cittadini europei non vorranno ulteriori allargamenti senza una base chiara per il futuro sviluppo dell’Unione. Non servirà a nulla pensare di poter riscrivere il Trattato di Nizza per la Croazia. Prima di tutto troviamo una soluzione per la Costituzione.
Per quanto riguarda l’energia, signora Presidente in carica del Consiglio, il grande cruccio del mio gruppo è che l’Unione europea corre il rischio di essere tenuta in ostaggio. Ostaggio dei produttori, in Russia o in Africa settentrionale o in Asia centrale, o forse persino nell’America latina, nel caso dei biocarburanti. Ciò che dobbiamo fare con urgenza in Europa è ridurre il consumo da parte dei veicoli a motore e dei dispositivi elettrici, ridurre il consumo di riscaldamento mediante una migliore progettazione degli edifici, ridurre il consumo dei dispositivi elettronici e aumentare la produzione di fonti di energia sicure e sostenibili: la biomassa, come ha proposto la Commissione, e le energie rinnovabili, forse attraverso la ricerca, passando a un’economia dell’idrogeno o alla fusione nucleare.
Dobbiamo liberalizzare i mercati, perché uno dei motivi per cui non abbiamo un’adeguata politica energetica in Europa è che non abbiamo un’adeguata liberalizzazione del mercato. Sono lieto che anche i socialdemocratici, riunitisi a Oporto la scorsa settimana, abbiano alla fine riconosciuto che la concorrenza sarà importante per lo sviluppo futuro.
Per quanto concerne la migrazione, Commissione e Consiglio si concentrano troppo sugli aspetti della sicurezza e non abbastanza su quelli economici e umanitari. Non si può parlare di “gestione efficace” della migrazione, di “rafforzare” FRONTEX e così via, senza riconoscere la tragedia umanitaria che si compie sulle nostre coste meridionali perché le persone sanno che troveranno lavoro in Europa. Il Presidente ha detto che si tratta di una sfida a lungo termine – è vero, ma da cinque anni la Commissione non fa nulla al riguardo, e bisogna andare avanti.
In conclusione, se il Consiglio affronterà la discussione per decidere la sede di Galileo (alla quale, mi pare di capire, aspirano Praga, La Valletta e Lubiana), perché non seguire l’esempio di questa magnifica Istituzione e non optare per una gestione su tre sedi? Almeno quelli che guarderanno alla sede di Galileo potranno dire
!"@it12
"Mr President, observers will be delighted to hear that the Presidency-in-Office is cutting down the length of the Council conclusions. I understand that the current draft is about 20 pages, at least in French, compared with the normal 60. They may not be so pleased to hear from Mr Poettering that the European People’s Party is meeting tomorrow to prepare the summit. They are so divided over issues like Turkey that, when they prepare the summit, things never get better! In fact, I understand that the Council Secretariat is preparing a letter saying, ‘please, if things don’t get better soon, we may have to ask you to stop helping us!’
I would like to address three issues that are on the agenda for the summit: enlargement, energy and migration. The Council will discuss enlargement and, no doubt, integration capacity. Perhaps they will find an agreement on where Europe ends, but I suspect that Jean Monnet might have been right when, addressing the predecessor to this assembly, the Common Assembly of the European Coal and Steel Community in 1955, he spoke of a ‘broader united Europe whose bounds are set only by those who have not yet joined’. As the Chinese would put it rather more prosaically, ‘the people who decide when the bus is full are those on the outside’.
It is important to discuss Turkey and I praise the Commission, and particularly the work of Commissioner Rehn, in taking action and making a firm proposal before there was time for an anarchy of reaction from national capitals; a firm proposal that was supported by the foreign ministers and, I hope, will be taken up by the Council. But let us then recognise that before we talk any more about enlargement, we are going to have to get our own constitutional arrangements sorted out, because the European people will not want us to enlarge further without a clear basis for the further development of our Union. It is not going to do any good to think we can rewrite the Nice Treaty for Croatia. Let us get the Constitution sorted first.
On energy, the great worry of my group, President-in-Office, is that the European Union is in danger of being held hostage. Held hostage to producers, whether they be in Russia or in North Africa or in Central Asia – or perhaps even in Latin America – in the case of biofuels. What we urgently need to do in Europe is to cut consumption by motor vehicles and electrical equipment; cut consumption of heating through better design of buildings; cut the consumption of electronic equipment; and increase production of safe, sustainable energy sources – biomass, as proposed by the Commission, and renewables, perhaps through research by moving to a hydrogen economy or looking into nuclear fusion.
We need to liberalise markets, because one of the reasons we do not have a proper energy policy in Europe is that we do not have a proper liberalisation of the market. I am pleased that even the Social Democrats, meeting in Oporto last week, have finally recognised that competition is going to be important for future development.
On migration, the Commission and the Council are concentrating too much on the security aspects, not enough on the economic or humanitarian aspects. You cannot talk of ‘effective management’ of migration, of ‘reinforcing’ FRONTEX and so on, without recognising the human tragedy unfolding on our southern shores because people know they will find jobs here in Europe. The President said this was a long-term challenge – yes, but for five years the Council has done nothing about it, and we must make progress.
Finally, if the Council does come to discuss the site for Galileo – I understand that Prague, Valetta and Ljubljana all want it – why do they not follow the example of this wonderful institution and have a three-site operation? At least those looking at the site for Galileo would be able to say
!"@lt14
"Mr President, observers will be delighted to hear that the Presidency-in-Office is cutting down the length of the Council conclusions. I understand that the current draft is about 20 pages, at least in French, compared with the normal 60. They may not be so pleased to hear from Mr Poettering that the European People’s Party is meeting tomorrow to prepare the summit. They are so divided over issues like Turkey that, when they prepare the summit, things never get better! In fact, I understand that the Council Secretariat is preparing a letter saying, ‘please, if things don’t get better soon, we may have to ask you to stop helping us!’
I would like to address three issues that are on the agenda for the summit: enlargement, energy and migration. The Council will discuss enlargement and, no doubt, integration capacity. Perhaps they will find an agreement on where Europe ends, but I suspect that Jean Monnet might have been right when, addressing the predecessor to this assembly, the Common Assembly of the European Coal and Steel Community in 1955, he spoke of a ‘broader united Europe whose bounds are set only by those who have not yet joined’. As the Chinese would put it rather more prosaically, ‘the people who decide when the bus is full are those on the outside’.
It is important to discuss Turkey and I praise the Commission, and particularly the work of Commissioner Rehn, in taking action and making a firm proposal before there was time for an anarchy of reaction from national capitals; a firm proposal that was supported by the foreign ministers and, I hope, will be taken up by the Council. But let us then recognise that before we talk any more about enlargement, we are going to have to get our own constitutional arrangements sorted out, because the European people will not want us to enlarge further without a clear basis for the further development of our Union. It is not going to do any good to think we can rewrite the Nice Treaty for Croatia. Let us get the Constitution sorted first.
On energy, the great worry of my group, President-in-Office, is that the European Union is in danger of being held hostage. Held hostage to producers, whether they be in Russia or in North Africa or in Central Asia – or perhaps even in Latin America – in the case of biofuels. What we urgently need to do in Europe is to cut consumption by motor vehicles and electrical equipment; cut consumption of heating through better design of buildings; cut the consumption of electronic equipment; and increase production of safe, sustainable energy sources – biomass, as proposed by the Commission, and renewables, perhaps through research by moving to a hydrogen economy or looking into nuclear fusion.
We need to liberalise markets, because one of the reasons we do not have a proper energy policy in Europe is that we do not have a proper liberalisation of the market. I am pleased that even the Social Democrats, meeting in Oporto last week, have finally recognised that competition is going to be important for future development.
On migration, the Commission and the Council are concentrating too much on the security aspects, not enough on the economic or humanitarian aspects. You cannot talk of ‘effective management’ of migration, of ‘reinforcing’ FRONTEX and so on, without recognising the human tragedy unfolding on our southern shores because people know they will find jobs here in Europe. The President said this was a long-term challenge – yes, but for five years the Council has done nothing about it, and we must make progress.
Finally, if the Council does come to discuss the site for Galileo – I understand that Prague, Valetta and Ljubljana all want it – why do they not follow the example of this wonderful institution and have a three-site operation? At least those looking at the site for Galileo would be able to say
!"@lv13
"Mr President, observers will be delighted to hear that the Presidency-in-Office is cutting down the length of the Council conclusions. I understand that the current draft is about 20 pages, at least in French, compared with the normal 60. They may not be so pleased to hear from Mr Poettering that the European People’s Party is meeting tomorrow to prepare the summit. They are so divided over issues like Turkey that, when they prepare the summit, things never get better! In fact, I understand that the Council Secretariat is preparing a letter saying, ‘please, if things don’t get better soon, we may have to ask you to stop helping us!’
I would like to address three issues that are on the agenda for the summit: enlargement, energy and migration. The Council will discuss enlargement and, no doubt, integration capacity. Perhaps they will find an agreement on where Europe ends, but I suspect that Jean Monnet might have been right when, addressing the predecessor to this assembly, the Common Assembly of the European Coal and Steel Community in 1955, he spoke of a ‘broader united Europe whose bounds are set only by those who have not yet joined’. As the Chinese would put it rather more prosaically, ‘the people who decide when the bus is full are those on the outside’.
It is important to discuss Turkey and I praise the Commission, and particularly the work of Commissioner Rehn, in taking action and making a firm proposal before there was time for an anarchy of reaction from national capitals; a firm proposal that was supported by the foreign ministers and, I hope, will be taken up by the Council. But let us then recognise that before we talk any more about enlargement, we are going to have to get our own constitutional arrangements sorted out, because the European people will not want us to enlarge further without a clear basis for the further development of our Union. It is not going to do any good to think we can rewrite the Nice Treaty for Croatia. Let us get the Constitution sorted first.
On energy, the great worry of my group, President-in-Office, is that the European Union is in danger of being held hostage. Held hostage to producers, whether they be in Russia or in North Africa or in Central Asia – or perhaps even in Latin America – in the case of biofuels. What we urgently need to do in Europe is to cut consumption by motor vehicles and electrical equipment; cut consumption of heating through better design of buildings; cut the consumption of electronic equipment; and increase production of safe, sustainable energy sources – biomass, as proposed by the Commission, and renewables, perhaps through research by moving to a hydrogen economy or looking into nuclear fusion.
We need to liberalise markets, because one of the reasons we do not have a proper energy policy in Europe is that we do not have a proper liberalisation of the market. I am pleased that even the Social Democrats, meeting in Oporto last week, have finally recognised that competition is going to be important for future development.
On migration, the Commission and the Council are concentrating too much on the security aspects, not enough on the economic or humanitarian aspects. You cannot talk of ‘effective management’ of migration, of ‘reinforcing’ FRONTEX and so on, without recognising the human tragedy unfolding on our southern shores because people know they will find jobs here in Europe. The President said this was a long-term challenge – yes, but for five years the Council has done nothing about it, and we must make progress.
Finally, if the Council does come to discuss the site for Galileo – I understand that Prague, Valetta and Ljubljana all want it – why do they not follow the example of this wonderful institution and have a three-site operation? At least those looking at the site for Galileo would be able to say
!"@mt15
"Mijnheer de Voorzitter, waarnemers zullen verheugd zijn dat de fungerend voorzitter de lengte van de conclusies van de Raad gaat inkorten. Ik heb begrepen dat waar het gewoonlijk zestig bladzijden zijn, althans in het Frans, het huidige ontwerp twintig bladzijden telt. Ze zullen misschien echter niet zo blij zijn van de heer Poettering te horen dat de Europese Volkspartij bijeenkomt om de Top voor te bereiden. Die fractie is zo verdeeld over kwesties als Turkije dat het er niet beter op wordt wanneer de Top door hen wordt voorbereid! Ik heb zelfs begrepen dat het secretariaat van de Raad een brief opstelt waarin staat: “Alstublieft, als er niet snel verbetering komt, dan moeten we u binnenkort wellicht vragen om ons niet meer te helpen!”
Ik wil graag drie onderwerpen noemen die op de agenda van de Top staan: uitbreiding, energie en migratie. De Raad zal een debat voeren over de uitbreiding en ongetwijfeld ook over het integratievermogen. Wellicht wordt er overeenstemming bereikt over de grenzen van Europa, maar ik vermoed dat Jean Monnet het bij het juiste eind had toen hij de voorloper van dit Parlement, de Gemeenschappelijke Vergadering van de Europese Gemeenschap voor Kolen en Staal (EGKS), toesprak met de woorden “de grenzen van een uitgebreid verenigd Europa worden alleen bepaald door de landen die nog niet zijn toegetreden”. De Chinezen zouden het wat prozaïscher verwoorden: “degenen die bepalen of de bus vol is, staan buiten”.
Het is van belang om te spreken over Turkije en ik prijs de Commissie, en in het bijzonder het werk van commissaris Rehn, omdat zij in actie zijn gekomen en een vastberaden voorstel hebben gedaan nog voordat de nationale hoofdsteden de kans zagen in gekrakeel uit te barsten. Dit vastberaden voorstel werd gesteund door de ministers van Buitenlandse Zaken en zal naar ik hoop worden opgepakt door de Raad. Laten wij echter inzien dat wij, voordat we verder praten over uitbreiding, eerst uit onze eigen constitutionele perikelen moeten zien te geraken. De Europese burgers zullen namelijk niet instemmen met verdere uitbreiding zolang er geen solide basis is voor de verdere ontwikkeling van onze gemeenschap. Het zal geen succes worden, indien we denken dat we het Verdrag van Nice voor Kroatië kunnen herschrijven. Laten we eerst verder zien te komen met de Grondwet.
Wanneer het gaat over energie, mevrouw de fungerend voorzitter, dan is mijn fractie uiterst bezorgd dat de Europese Unie gevaar loopt gegijzeld te worden door producenten van biobrandstoffen, of zij nu uit Rusland komen, uit Noord Afrika, uit Centraal Azië of wellicht zelfs uit Latijns Amerika. Wij moeten in Europa dringend het energieverbruik van motorvoertuigen en elektrische apparaten verminderen. We moeten het ontwerp van gebouwen verbeteren, zodat het verbruik door verwarminginstallaties wordt verminderd. We moeten de productie van veilige, duurzame energiebronnen zoals biomassa verhogen, zoals de Commissie heeft voorgesteld, hergebruik bevorderen, en onderzoek doen naar de mogelijkheden van een op waterstof gebaseerde economie en naar kernfusie.
Wij moeten de markten liberaliseren, want een van de redenen waarom we in Europa nog geen fatsoenlijk energiebeleid hebben, is dat er geen behoorlijke vrije markt bestaat. Ik ben verheugd dat zelfs de sociaal-democraten die vorige week in Oporto bijeen waren, uiteindelijk het belang van mededinging voor toekomstige ontwikkeling hebben erkend.
Wanneer het gaat over migratie, zijn de Commissie en de Raad teveel gericht op de veiligheidsaspecten en zich niet bewust genoeg van de economische of humanitaire kanten van migratie. Je kunt niet spreken over “effectief migratiemanagement” of het “versterken” van Frontex enzovoorts, zonder oog te hebben voor de humanitaire ramp die zich in de zuidelijke kustgebieden voltrekt en waarvan mensen het slachtoffer zijn die weten dat ze hier in Europa een baan zullen vinden. De voorzitter zei dat dit een langetermijnuitdaging is en dat klopt, maar de afgelopen vijf jaar heeft de Raad daar niets mee gedaan en we moeten vooruitgang boeken.
Tot slot vraag ik waarom de Raad, zodra hij aankomt bij de bespreking van het hoofdkwartier van Galileo - en naar ik heb begrepen hebben Praag, Valetta en Ljubljana allemaal interesse - niet het voorbeeld zou kunnen volgen van deze prachtige instelling en kunnen kiezen voor drie vestigingsplaatsen? Dan zouden degenen die het hoofdkwartier van Galileo bekijken kunnen zeggen:
!"@nl3
"Mr President, observers will be delighted to hear that the Presidency-in-Office is cutting down the length of the Council conclusions. I understand that the current draft is about 20 pages, at least in French, compared with the normal 60. They may not be so pleased to hear from Mr Poettering that the European People’s Party is meeting tomorrow to prepare the summit. They are so divided over issues like Turkey that, when they prepare the summit, things never get better! In fact, I understand that the Council Secretariat is preparing a letter saying, ‘please, if things don’t get better soon, we may have to ask you to stop helping us!’
I would like to address three issues that are on the agenda for the summit: enlargement, energy and migration. The Council will discuss enlargement and, no doubt, integration capacity. Perhaps they will find an agreement on where Europe ends, but I suspect that Jean Monnet might have been right when, addressing the predecessor to this assembly, the Common Assembly of the European Coal and Steel Community in 1955, he spoke of a ‘broader united Europe whose bounds are set only by those who have not yet joined’. As the Chinese would put it rather more prosaically, ‘the people who decide when the bus is full are those on the outside’.
It is important to discuss Turkey and I praise the Commission, and particularly the work of Commissioner Rehn, in taking action and making a firm proposal before there was time for an anarchy of reaction from national capitals; a firm proposal that was supported by the foreign ministers and, I hope, will be taken up by the Council. But let us then recognise that before we talk any more about enlargement, we are going to have to get our own constitutional arrangements sorted out, because the European people will not want us to enlarge further without a clear basis for the further development of our Union. It is not going to do any good to think we can rewrite the Nice Treaty for Croatia. Let us get the Constitution sorted first.
On energy, the great worry of my group, President-in-Office, is that the European Union is in danger of being held hostage. Held hostage to producers, whether they be in Russia or in North Africa or in Central Asia – or perhaps even in Latin America – in the case of biofuels. What we urgently need to do in Europe is to cut consumption by motor vehicles and electrical equipment; cut consumption of heating through better design of buildings; cut the consumption of electronic equipment; and increase production of safe, sustainable energy sources – biomass, as proposed by the Commission, and renewables, perhaps through research by moving to a hydrogen economy or looking into nuclear fusion.
We need to liberalise markets, because one of the reasons we do not have a proper energy policy in Europe is that we do not have a proper liberalisation of the market. I am pleased that even the Social Democrats, meeting in Oporto last week, have finally recognised that competition is going to be important for future development.
On migration, the Commission and the Council are concentrating too much on the security aspects, not enough on the economic or humanitarian aspects. You cannot talk of ‘effective management’ of migration, of ‘reinforcing’ FRONTEX and so on, without recognising the human tragedy unfolding on our southern shores because people know they will find jobs here in Europe. The President said this was a long-term challenge – yes, but for five years the Council has done nothing about it, and we must make progress.
Finally, if the Council does come to discuss the site for Galileo – I understand that Prague, Valetta and Ljubljana all want it – why do they not follow the example of this wonderful institution and have a three-site operation? At least those looking at the site for Galileo would be able to say
!"@pl16
"Senhor Presidente, os observadores vão gostar imenso de saber que a Presidência em exercício do Conselho está a cortar a extensão das conclusões do Conselho. Julgo saber que o projecto actual tem cerca de 20 páginas, pelo menos em francês, enquanto o tamanho normal é de 60 páginas. Já talvez não fiquem tão satisfeitos quando o senhor deputado Poettering lhes disser que o Grupo do Partido Popular Europeu vai reunir amanhã para preparar a cimeira. Eles estão tão divididos em relação a temas como a Turquia que, quando preparam a cimeira as coisas nunca melhoram! Efectivamente, já soube que o secretariado do Conselho está a preparar uma carta dizendo “por favor, se as coisas não melhorarem dentro em breve, vamos ter de vos pedir que deixem de nos ajudar!”
Gostaria de abordar três questões que se encontram na ordem do dia para a cimeira: alargamento, energia e imigração. O Conselho vai abordar o alargamento e, sem duvida, a capacidade de integração. Talvez cheguem a algum acordo sobre onde é que a Europa termina, mas suspeito que Jean Monnet devia estar certo quando, em 1955, dirigindo-se à antecessora desta Câmara, a Assembleia Comum da Comunidade Europeia do Carvão e do Aço, falou acerca de uma “Europa unida e mais alargada, cujas fronteiras apenas são marcadas por aqueles que ainda aderiram”. Dito pelos chineses, de uma forma bastante mais prosaica “quem decide a altura em que o autocarro fica cheio são as pessoas que ficam de fora”.
É importante discutir a Turquia e elogiar a Comissão, e particularmente o trabalho do Senhor Comissário Rehn, agindo e apresentando uma proposta firme antes de haver tempo para uma anarquia de reacções das capitais nacionais, uma proposta firme que foi apoiada pelos Ministros dos Negócios Estrangeiros e, espero, seja adoptada pelo Conselho. Mas, vamos reconhecê-lo antes de falarmos mais sobre alargamento, vamos ter de resolver o problema das nossas próprias disposições constitucionais, pois os europeus não vão querer que continuemos a fazer mais alargamentos sem existir uma clara base para prosseguir o desenvolvimento da nossa União. Não nos vai valer de nada pensar que podemos reescrever o Tratado de Nice em relação à Croácia. Vamos, primeiro, resolver o problema da Constituição.
Sobre a energia, a grande preocupação do meu grupo, Senhor Presidente em exercício do Conselho, é de que a União Europeia corre o perigo de ficar refém. Refém dos produtores, estejam eles na Rússia, no Norte de África ou na Ásia Central – ou talvez até na América Latina – no caso dos biocombustíveis. o que precisamos de fazer urgentemente na Europa é reduzir o consumo dos veículos a motor e do equipamento eléctrico, diminuir o consumo em aquecimento através de uma melhor concepção dos edifícios, reduzir o consumo dos equipamentos electrónicos, e aumentar a produção de fontes de energia seguras e sustentáveis – biomassa, tal como proposto pela Comissão, e energias renováveis talvez através da investigação ou adoptando a economia do hidrogénio ou ainda investigando a fusão nuclear.
Precisamos de liberalizar os mercados, pois uma das razões por que não possuímos uma boa política energética na Europa tem a ver com o facto de não termos uma boa liberalização do mercado. ainda bem que, até os Sociais-Democratas, reunidos no Porto, na semana passada, reconheceram finalmente que a concorrência vai ser importante para o desenvolvimento futuro.
Relativamente à imigração, a Comissão e o Conselho estão demasiado concentrados nos aspectos securitários e não suficientemente nos aspectos económicos e humanitários. Não podemos falar de “gestão efectiva” da migração, de “reforçar” o Frontex e assim sucessivamente, sem reconhecer a tragédia humana que se desenrola nas praias dos nossos países do sul, devido ao facto de as pessoas saberem que vão encontrar trabalho aqui na Europa. O Presidente referiu que se trata de um desafio a longo prazo – sim, mas durante cinco anos o Conselho nada fez, e agora é preciso fazer progressos.
Por último, se o Conselho chegar a debater a localização para o Galileo – julgo saber que Praga. La Valetta e Ljubljana estão muito interessadas – por que não seguir o exemplo desta nossa maravilhosa Instituição e ter o programa a funcionar em três locais? Pelo menos, quem olhasse para a sede do Galileo podia dizer a célebre frase
!"@pt17
"Mr President, observers will be delighted to hear that the Presidency-in-Office is cutting down the length of the Council conclusions. I understand that the current draft is about 20 pages, at least in French, compared with the normal 60. They may not be so pleased to hear from Mr Poettering that the European People’s Party is meeting tomorrow to prepare the summit. They are so divided over issues like Turkey that, when they prepare the summit, things never get better! In fact, I understand that the Council Secretariat is preparing a letter saying, ‘please, if things don’t get better soon, we may have to ask you to stop helping us!’
I would like to address three issues that are on the agenda for the summit: enlargement, energy and migration. The Council will discuss enlargement and, no doubt, integration capacity. Perhaps they will find an agreement on where Europe ends, but I suspect that Jean Monnet might have been right when, addressing the predecessor to this assembly, the Common Assembly of the European Coal and Steel Community in 1955, he spoke of a ‘broader united Europe whose bounds are set only by those who have not yet joined’. As the Chinese would put it rather more prosaically, ‘the people who decide when the bus is full are those on the outside’.
It is important to discuss Turkey and I praise the Commission, and particularly the work of Commissioner Rehn, in taking action and making a firm proposal before there was time for an anarchy of reaction from national capitals; a firm proposal that was supported by the foreign ministers and, I hope, will be taken up by the Council. But let us then recognise that before we talk any more about enlargement, we are going to have to get our own constitutional arrangements sorted out, because the European people will not want us to enlarge further without a clear basis for the further development of our Union. It is not going to do any good to think we can rewrite the Nice Treaty for Croatia. Let us get the Constitution sorted first.
On energy, the great worry of my group, President-in-Office, is that the European Union is in danger of being held hostage. Held hostage to producers, whether they be in Russia or in North Africa or in Central Asia – or perhaps even in Latin America – in the case of biofuels. What we urgently need to do in Europe is to cut consumption by motor vehicles and electrical equipment; cut consumption of heating through better design of buildings; cut the consumption of electronic equipment; and increase production of safe, sustainable energy sources – biomass, as proposed by the Commission, and renewables, perhaps through research by moving to a hydrogen economy or looking into nuclear fusion.
We need to liberalise markets, because one of the reasons we do not have a proper energy policy in Europe is that we do not have a proper liberalisation of the market. I am pleased that even the Social Democrats, meeting in Oporto last week, have finally recognised that competition is going to be important for future development.
On migration, the Commission and the Council are concentrating too much on the security aspects, not enough on the economic or humanitarian aspects. You cannot talk of ‘effective management’ of migration, of ‘reinforcing’ FRONTEX and so on, without recognising the human tragedy unfolding on our southern shores because people know they will find jobs here in Europe. The President said this was a long-term challenge – yes, but for five years the Council has done nothing about it, and we must make progress.
Finally, if the Council does come to discuss the site for Galileo – I understand that Prague, Valetta and Ljubljana all want it – why do they not follow the example of this wonderful institution and have a three-site operation? At least those looking at the site for Galileo would be able to say
!"@sk18
"Herr talman! Observatörerna kommer att bli glada över att höra att det nuvarande ordförandeskapet kortar ned rådets slutsatser. Det nuvarande förslaget är, åtminstone på franska, på runt 20 sidor jämfört med 60 sidor, som det brukar vara. Men de blir kanske inte lika glada när Hans-Gert Poettering berättar att Europeiska folkpartiet sammanträder i morgon för att förbereda mötet. De är så splittrade i frågor som Turkiet att ingenting kan bli bättre av att de förbereder toppmötet! Vad jag förstår håller rådets sekretariat faktiskt på att förbereda en skrivelse med innebörden ”om situationen inte blir bättre snart, får vi be er att sluta hjälpa oss”.
Jag skulle vilja ta upp tre frågor från toppmötets dagordning: utvidgning, energi och migration. Rådet kommer att diskutera utvidgningen och med all sannolikhet även integrationskapaciteten. Det kommer kanske att enas om var Europa slutar, men jag misstänker att Jean Monnet hade rätt när han 1955 vände sig till föregångaren till vårt parlament, gemenskapsförsamlingen i Europeiska kol- och stålgemenskapen, och talade om ett ”bredare enat Europa vars gränser uteslutande bestäms av dem som ännu inte är medlemmar”. Kineserna skulle ha uttryckt det på ett vardagligare sätt: ”de som blir kvar utanför bussen avgör när den är full”.
Det är viktigt att diskutera Turkiet och jag berömmer kommissionen, i synnerhet kommissionsledamot Olli Rehn, som innan de nationella kapitalisterna hann komma med en anarki av reaktioner tog tag i saken och lade fram ett starkt förslag. Detta starka förslag stöds av utrikesministrarna och jag hoppas att det kommer att tas upp i rådet. Men innan vi talar mer om utvidgningen är det viktigt att vi får ordning på våra egna konstitutionella planer, för det europeiska folket vill inte att vi utvidgar EU mer utan en tydlig föreställning om hur unionen ska utvecklas. Det tjänar ingenting till att tro att vi kan skriva om Nicefördraget för Kroatien. Vi måste få ordning på konstitutionen först.
När det gäller energi är min grupp orolig att EU ska tas som gisslan. Tas som gisslan av biobränsleproducenter i Ryssland, Nordamerika eller Centralasien – eller kanske till och med i Latinamerika. Det är viktigt att vi i Europa snabbt minskar konsumtionen av motorfordon och elektrisk utrustning, minskar konsumtionen av uppvärmning genom bättre konstruerade byggnader, minskar konsumtionen av elektronisk utrustning och ökar produktionen av säkra och hållbara energikällor såsom biomassa som föreslås av kommissionen och förnybar energi, kanske genom forskning eller genom att övergå till en väteekonomi eller undersöka kärnfusioner.
Vi måste liberalisera marknaderna, för en av anledningarna till att vi saknar en lämplig energipolitik i Europa är att vi saknar en lämplig liberalisering av marknaden. Det gläder mig att till och med socialdemokraterna som hade ett möte i Oporto förra veckan äntligen har insett att konkurrens kommer att bli viktigt för den framtida utvecklingen.
När det gäller migration lägger kommissionen och rådet för stor vikt vid säkerhetsaspekterna och för liten vid de ekonomiska och humanitära aspekterna. Det går inte att tala om en ”effektiv hantering” av migration och att ”förstärka” den europeiska gränsförvaltningsbyrån och så vidare, utan att erkänna den mänskliga tragedi som utspelas längs EU:s sydkuster på grund av att människor ser fram emot att få jobb här i Europa. Ordföranden hävdade att detta var en långsiktig utmaning – ja, men rådet har inte gjort någonting åt det här under fem år och nu måste vi göra framsteg.
Om rådet skulle komma att diskutera sätet för Galileo – och jag har förstått att både Prag, Valetta och Ljubljana vill ha det – undrar jag avslutningsvis varför de inte följer denna fantastiska institutions exempel och förlägger den till tre orter? Då skulle åtminstone de som betraktade Galileos placering kunna säga
[och likväl rör den sig]!"@sv21
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
"Graham Watson,"5,19,15,1,18,14,16,11,13,20,4
"eppur si muove"5,19,15,1,18,14,16,11,2,21,7,3,10,13,4,9,20,17,12,8
"on behalf of the ALDE Group"5,19,15,1,18,14,16,11,13,4
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples