Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-04-11-Speech-2-107"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20000411.5.2-107"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, I would first like to highlight some positive conclusions resulting from the Lisbon European Council, which essentially relate to the joint motion for a resolution supported amongst others by my group, and which has already been attacked so fiercely here by the Socialists. These conclusions were presented by the Heads of State and Government as part of a strategic objective to make the European Union the most competitive area in the world within ten years, by developing a knowledge-based economy and adopting policies geared towards growth and full employment.
I must ask this, however: do the statements by those currently in power in Europe, who are, in the majority, Socialists, and who, for various years have headed the governments of their respective countries, not above all reveal more about their shortcomings and the serious failures of the European development model which they have been promoting? Is there anything genuinely new and original about the Lisbon Summit conclusions that had not already been diagnosed and stated in the 1993 White Paper “Growth, Competitiveness, Employment”? A commitment was made at that time to, and I quote, “information networks”; today the commitment is stressed, and I quote again “to the area of knowledge and access to the information society”. In the White Paper, the stress was put on “lifelong learning and continuing training”. Now, and I quote once again, the issue is “lifelong learning”.
I could go on, as there are countless conclusions completely identical to those in the 1993 White Paper. There is nevertheless one aspect that deserves a particular mention in the area of policies for full employment. In 1993, the objective was to halve the number of unemployed in the European Union, from 17 million to 8.5 million. The fact is that we are now in 2000, unemployment still stands at 15 million and the summit conclusions promise us rates of almost full employment in ten years’ time.
This is at best politically irresponsible and displays a mentality which is quite typical of the Socialists, even for those followers of the third way, which is based on the proactive development of a strategy which, as you all know, is the product of many different factors and is ultimately based on the actions of businesses. As one well-known analyst said, Europe’s leaders have decided on something that they cannot possibly achieve. To promise, as they have done, ambitious targets for growth and employment is equivalent to announcing an increase in the population or the number of days of sunshine. We believe that the role of governments should instead be to focus on developing means to enable social and economic agents to generate wealth and to produce positive results in these areas.
Another aspect that is worthy of attention is essentially that the summit appears to have ignored the fact that the countries of the European Union have different historical backgrounds and economic and social structures. These are disparities which eastward enlargement will only accentuate, and the summit also appears to have ignored the fact that there are still imbalances that even average levels of development cannot hide. This applies to both positive and negative aspects. How can we explain, for example, that Sweden and Finland, countries with highly developed social protection systems, have levels of Internet use identical to those in the United States, that is around 50%, whilst the United Kingdom, a much more liberal country, has levels of around 29%?
On the other hand, how is it that there can still be gross disparities in the minimum wage levels of some Member States, marked differences in the quality of social security systems and in the value of retirement pensions, and even in levels of unemployment or hidden unemployment, not to mention increasingly widespread pockets of poverty and exclusion?
The European Union may have begun its race towards levels of development already seen in America’s economy and businesses, but this, the real Europe, will not become a reality until the convergence of national economies and internal economic and social cohesion are given top priority."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples