Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-02-15-Speech-2-023"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20000215.3.2-023"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, a five-year programme is an extremely important undertaking, and this is why I preferred that you be given the unabridged text of the speech, which is available in four languages.
Our programme highlights the major points of reference, the major areas for action: firstly, the development of new forms of governance for Europe; secondly, extension and enlargement of the area of peace, freedom, and security; thirdly, the launch of a new stage in the growth of the economy; fourthly, safeguarding and improving quality of life. These will be our major guidelines for action over the next five years.
With regard to the first area – new forms of governance for Europe – you already know that the Commission has undertaken to produce a White Paper and not a full legislative text since, in the light of major issues which are changing the structure of the way we interact, the Commission is first of all preparing for a debate; we will subsequently discuss the content with you; this will give rise to a policy document, and finally, a legislative document. This is an effective, transparent way to proceed and involve all the European institutions and the citizens of Europe.
This White Paper is a response to the challenges that enlargement is forcing on us, an enlargement that is forcing us to rethink the workings of all our institutions, rethink our very policies – all our policies – and above all rethink what we must continue to do at Union level when the Member States number 25 or 30, and what will be the best thing to do at individual State level, at regional level and at local government level. But it is not only enlargement that is urging us towards this rethink: as I said a few moments ago, it is also economic and political globalisation itself.
We must govern Europe in such a way as to make us more efficient, to bring us closer to the citizens and to encourage everyone to get involved, starting with the important issue of the involvement of women. One of the main differences in the comparison made recently between Europe and the United States was not so much job mobility or risk capital, as women’s involvement in economic life, an issue that has much more prominence in the United States than in Europe. This is a field where Europe has, nevertheless, always been in the vanguard. We therefore need to reflect on this at length and with an open mind, and all the institutions – Commission, Parliament, Council – will have to consider their own roles and their own policies. We shall therefore get straight back to work on this White Paper, although in order to finish it, we shall have to wait for the results of the Intergovernmental Conference, and it will therefore not be ready until spring 2001. It will not be a philosophical Paper, but a practical Paper, full of focused proposals.
We – the Commission – are the first to know that we must have a total rethink, and we shall therefore do two things: we are, and will continue to be, fully committed to internal reform, and we shall rethink our policies in detail.
I have asked all the Commissioners – and I shall ask them once again in a still more analytical way – to pinpoint all the activities that we can forgo. The Commission must define what its fundamental activities are, what it must concentrate on and shed its non-essential activities, thereby freeing up new resources and ensuring a more correct and co-operative relationship with individual countries, regions and local communities.
So we shall be freeing up new resources, but – I fear, and I want to state this before Parliament – the time will come when these new resources that we are already freeing up will, in turn, be insufficient in terms of allowing us to address our new tasks: I am thinking of enlargement, the new sector of justice and home affairs, health issues and environmental matters. When that time comes, when we have used up all our resources, I shall not hesitate to come here before you to request further resources, but what I am saying now is that if we are not given these necessary resources, we shall have to refuse to take on any new duties because the available resources will not be commensurate with the new tasks that we will be taking on.
As for internal reform, you well know how committed my Commission has been to this since day one. I know full well that we will not be able to achieve any political objective if the Commission does not undertake vigorous and comprehensive internal reform, if it does not become more efficient, if it does not increase efficiency in all sectors, starting with the sector in which the worst backlogs have built up in the past – external aid. Providing aid rapidly, when it is needed, saves human lives; in many cases providing it late is worse than not providing it at all.
When I speak about external aid, my thoughts immediately turn to the Balkans. There is cause for hope thanks to the commitment of our workers on the ground, an extraordinary commitment given our organisational problems. My thoughts also turn to Bernard Kouchner’s efforts, of the stability pact that we all vigorously support with total dedication, but I also think of new events, such as Croatia, where the situation has changed in a few weeks: the European institutions immediately opened the way to dialogue with this country and received the news knowing full well that the only way to resolve not only Bosnia’s problems, but more particularly Serbia’s problems is to throw a curtain of democracy around Serbia. This is the new element that we must help to bring to the Balkans.
We must increase our efficiency in this area. We must reopen the Danube to boats. It is contradictory to offer aid to Romania and Bulgaria yet leave these countries unable to harness their greatest resource. We must decontaminate the river and, in view of this, over the next few days the Commissioner responsible for the environment will be putting forward specific plans to monitor this serious problem.
To respect my speaking time, I will confine myself to referring only to the broad outlines of my programme: a programme for the dawning of a new legislature and a new century, when it is right and proper to see Europe in a broader perspective, a Europe which is currently in a paradoxical situation. Let us remember that for half a century, Europe has provided us with peace, security and freedom and a united Europe has also contributed to giving us a period of unprecedented prosperity.
We have done a lot in the Balkans: the new European Reconstruction Agency for Kosovo, the Balkans Task Force
and new regulations to speed up procedures. Nevertheless, we definitely have to do more. We must liberalise trade within the region and between the region and the European Union; we must contribute to building infrastructural links that will end its centuries-old isolation; we must intensify efforts to build a democratic, pluralist society in these countries with institutions, public structures, police forces and a structured civil society, but, above all, we must press these countries to work together in the context of a united region, as regards both politics and the economy. If we do not do this, we shall have failed in our duty. Remember that the Marshall Plan was not effective simply because of the scale of its resources: it was even more effective because it made us Europeans work together towards a new horizon; it gave us a fresh outlook in terms of our politics and our economy. This is what we need to do for the Balkans. Europe must prove – in the Balkans and the rest of the world – its ability to extend the area of security, peace and freedom and its ability to take a leading role on the international stage.
We are clearly, once again, returning to enlargement, which must be put into practice in tandem with the extension of the area of security, peace and freedom. We have made many promises in this regard, but I believe we shall succeed in keeping our promises even though we have a very delicate path to tread. Indeed, enlargement, which will be with us for our five years in office and beyond – I am referring to the aspirations of applicant countries – must hinge on concrete, objective criteria, and also on reassuring public opinion in the countries involved and, to an even greater degree, public opinion in our own Member States.
There will be friendship, calm, openness but also a certain strictness in the enlargement process. I repeat: we must reassure public opinion in those countries that wish to join but we need to provide public opinion in our own Member States with even greater reassurance.
Our responsibilities do not stop at enlargement, or at the Balkans. There are certain other key issues: relations with Ukraine, relations with Russia, relations with neighbouring countries and more importantly, the important question of relations with the southern Mediterranean which will be a crucial point for European history, and for security and peace in Europe for future generations. In this regard, we have a responsibility towards the whole of Africa. In recent times, Africa has raised hopes and has received offers of help, but nothing tangible has yet been achieved. In recent years in Africa, we have not seen a shift from totalitarian regimes to democracy, but quite the contrary – a shift from democracy to totalitarian regimes. Africa is, for us, a worrying topic for discussion. We therefore have another duty at international level, which has already been proposed by the Commissioner responsible for trade: the undertaking to relaunch the Millennium Round and to take on some fundamental problems affecting the poorest countries, not just in terms of writing off debts, but also via the unilateral opening-up to trade with the poorest countries in the world, with a great deal of willingness on our part, which we had already proposed prior to Seattle but which we could not put into practice.
We need to provide alternative answers, otherwise episodes such as those seen in Seattle will be repeated over and over and will come to hamper one of Europe’s positive roles in history. All over the world, Europe’s actions must be guided by a deep respect for the principles of freedom and respect for the rights of individuals and minorities. We should remember that we, the European Union, are a union of minorities: we are all a minority within Europe. There are concerns even within the Fifteen, concerns which may even surface again in the next decade. I am referring to the situation in Austria, where the Commission has remained true to its role, being duty-bound to work towards the cohesion of the Union, but also the unwavering guardian of the Treaties, ready to punish every minor breach of the principles of democracy, law and respect for minorities. Some people have criticised me over the congratulatory message I sent to Chancellor Schüssel. My message to you is: do not take the necessary and proper courtesies of form to mean that I have been less firm in the content. Reread the letter: The reference to the fundamental values of the Union is taken – and this is more than mere coincidence – from Article 6 of the Treaty, I repeat, Article 6 of the Treaty.
I would also ask you whether you believe that any other European head of government has ever been reminded of these principles by the Commission when they were elected. This is what we wish to do: maintain our role as a supranational structure, maintain the role conferred on us by the Treaties, but also be unwavering on principles and make judgements based on facts.
Last November, the Commission tabled a proposal for an anti-racism directive. I would ask the Council to adopt it swiftly and I would ask Parliament to help us with this action which will further strengthen the fundamental bases of our social cohesion.
I will quickly conclude by mentioning the last two points of our programme: the economy and quality of life. I have already talked about the economy: we well know which basic ingredients will set Europe on the path towards a lasting recovery which will in turn create more jobs. We must continue to keep inflation under control, proceed with liberalisation, ensure more competition, encourage the dissemination of information technology and all new technologies; push forward with science, and push back scientific boundaries, and develop an appetite for being at the cutting edge of science. The forthcoming Lisbon Summit on these issues – dissemination of technology, employment – will be a decisive summit. It has taken four years for us to be in a position to hold a summit of this kind. We are at last holding it and cannot let this opportunity slip through our fingers.
Finally, our last commitment is to improve quality of life. We have opened this chapter with the White Paper on Food Safety: we now need to make significant headway in the environment sector. The Erika oil slick and the contamination of the Danube demonstrates the pressing need for European scale intervention to safeguard the environment. The time has come to discuss, and then establish, a body for emergency civil protection in Europe. All too often we find ourselves calling for this after a disaster has occurred. I think it would be appropriate to begin thinking about these things before disasters happen.
These are the challenges that we – the Commission but also all the other European institutions – are facing. How will we judge, ladies and gentlemen, Madam President, the five years of our mandate? How are we going to assess the results of these five years? I do not know, but one benchmark we could certainly use is the challenge we must take up together. Let us take a very simple parameter: turnout at the next European elections. If it is higher than at the previous elections, it will mean that we have successfully met our challenge.
We are now seeing the beginning of a strong recovery, which it appears may even be sustainable for a good while yet if we are prudent with our policies. This recovery is the logical consequence of the efforts we have made, but it comes at a price: it follows the restructuring of public accounts in European countries, which have kept inflation under control with a policy wisely intended to control costs and increase productivity in a Europe that has begun a vigorous restructuring of its own industries, banks and public services, even though this process is not yet complete and still has a long way to go.
Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, we are faced with all these major political challenges, but precisely because of the recovery that is now underway, we are also faced with major opportunities. This, ladies and gentlemen, could be the decade of Europe. Indeed, I would say that this must be the decade of Europe.
Nevertheless, despite these aspects, European citizens are disappointed and concerned: by unemployment which is not falling quickly enough; by a Europe trailing behind in technology, and seemingly falling even further behind, and in particular a scientific sector which is starting to lag a long way behind too; by the European institutions which appear distant and do not seem to be in step with the times, starting with the Commission itself. The crisis in the Commission was, in fact, a crucial point in the relationship between Europe and its citizens, and the low turnout at the European elections was a worrying indication of this.
Even stronger still, however, is the sense of insecurity, the feeling of being unprepared in a new world that is moving forwards, a world which is completely changing, where globalisation will even end up changing our points of reference. This is not the first time this has happened: Europe was once confronted with a similar transformation, an explosion of its markets, a change in its points of reference and a different view of the world. I am referring to the sixteenth century when the discovery of America turned everything upside down. Some countries – such as France and Spain – managed to meet the challenge, giving rise to great nation States; other countries – such as Italy – did not meet this challenge and lost all the headway that they had accumulated during the first part of that millennium: headway in science, technology, economic progress, defence structures and military organisation, philosophy and literature.
Today, Europe is facing a similar challenge, and we know that, just as history has been unforgiving in the past, it will not be forgiving in the present.
In this context of wholesale change, and in order to prevent our nation States vanishing again, in the wake of globalisation which is creating hitherto unprecedented scales and challenges, Europe needs to be economically strong, because globalisation demands unity, because every day we hear news of new agreements at world level and news of changes at European level too. But more vital still is a Europe that feels strong in the political arena.
In years past, the single market and the single currency have been the pivotal point of our actions, the mainstay of European life. Today, the new frontiers of European integration are political frontiers: common foreign and security policy, justice and internal security, and – to a lesser extent – the crucial question of the fundamental political values on which our coexistence is based.
The Commission has therefore adopted the strategic programme for 2000-2005, a programme that was immediately sent to the European Parliament and with which you are already familiar, so I will not go into detail about it now. Some of you may find it lacks detail, but no political structure sets out detailed five-year programmes. This is the European Union, not the Soviet Union."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples