Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-10-04-Speech-3-362"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20001004.15.3-362"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, may I first of all thank the rapporteur and also all those, in the relevant committee and in this Chamber, who have committed themselves to making mobility a reality.
Allow me now to return to Amendments Nos 46 to 51 which, with a view to ensuring that the recommendation is followed up, request the Member States and the Commission to put in place a process which might be considered similar to the Luxembourg process in the case of employment. I agree with the objective, but there is an important reason why the Commission has adopted the position it has on these amendments, and that is because, by accepting them as they stand and in their present proposed wording, the same problem would arise as when we speak about the action plan which the ministers and the Commission want to have finished drafting by November. Considerable new human resources, which do not exist at present, would be necessary. I did not want to leave the matter as it stands. That is why I spoke about it this morning at the meeting of the Commission, and the conclusion drawn by the Commissioners was clear.
Following the communication of the 26 July on matching human resources to the institution’s tasks, the Commission cannot accept new tasks unless the budgetary authority allocates it the necessary resources for carrying these out. This is a position of principle, to be applied generally and not only to what is of concern to us now. It is a collegiate position adopted by the Commission, in view of the decisions taken, in view of the peer group and in view of staffing problems. From now on, the Commission will give the same answer on all topics. The budgetary authority will therefore have to ensure that we have the material resources for taking action.
That being said, I should nonetheless like to remind you that the Commission already has a monitoring system which will be placed within the framework of the new open method of coordination, recommended by the Lisbon European Council. This open method of cooperation is based upon the assumption that European guidelines will be established, the implementation of which it will be possible to adapt in relation to regional and national diversity. It will also, however, enable monitoring to be carried out periodically so that the Member States can progressively develop their own strategies where mobility is concerned.
I think, Mr Mantovani, that, over and above the questions of principle that bind me to the Commission’s collegiate decision, there is an avenue to be explored here, and it might perhaps be necessary to look for alternatives in this area. In any case, I am happy to have a discussion with you to see what can be done in this respect.
Finally, the Commission cannot adopt Amendments Nos 8 and 58, the former because the Lisbon conclusions, which have already been listed in recital 11, encourage the Member States to take the necessary measures to promote mobility, and I can assure you that the Member States are proceeding along the right lines. They demonstrated as much last Saturday in Paris when, for a whole afternoon, they discussed the issue in depth and made commitments to mobility. A good start has been made. Finally, Amendment No 58 cannot be adopted, quite simply because it duplicates Amendment No 37 proposed by Parliament on the same subject.
I think we are on the right road to reaching an agreement on the content, without necessarily having to resort to a second reading. This would allow the Education Council to adopt a text on 9 November enabling the French Presidency to present the Nice European Council with the ‘mobility’ package requested by the Heads of State and Government in the conclusions to the Lisbon Council.
We all want the same thing. We want there to be real progress on this issue in the real conditions in our regions and our Member States. I should also like to do much more when it comes to the recognition of qualifications. At the moment, and as the Treaties at present stand, it is a national responsibility, which is not to say that I am not doing anything. I am in constant discussion with ministers. I also know that account has to be taken of the autonomy and independence of universities but, by means of our network systems, we have brought the universities closer together, and they engage ever more frequently in joint ventures and recognise students from other universities and studies completed in those universities. Things are moving slowly, and that is frustrating because the objective can be seen there before us. It is a fine objective, and we should like matters to move more quickly. In politics, things do not, unfortunately, always move as quickly as one would wish. If, however, the pressure is kept up, we shall get there. So, help me to do just that.
Believe me, I know what you are saying, and a lot more besides. It is through practical action and not through green or white papers or, for that matter, black or red ones, that problems are solved. And what we have here is practical action. Believe me, it is not easy. Do not imagine that, by setting a recommendation down on paper, there will be cheers of joy from all the Member States. No, a number of Member States will have to be forced to eliminate obstacles of a kind which may seem ridiculous. However, there are still definitely barriers to the removal of these obstacles, and I have not finished persuading all the Member States of the fact, but I am still optimistic.
I am an optimist for two reasons. First of all because, as a European Commissioner, if I want to make progress, I cannot allow myself to be pessimistic; and secondly because, in spite of all the problems of which I am aware, hundreds of thousands of students and hundreds and thousands of parents and grandparents thank me when I meet them and tell me that the experience they were able to have was terrific. Go into the street and ask young, and not so young, people which European programmes they have heard of, and they will tell you – Socrates and Erasmus.
So, in spite of the persistent problems, of which I am aware, these programmes are of positive value and contribute something to the people of Europe. I agree with you that the obstacles which still exist need to be removed. I would thank you for your cooperation on this matter. It is easy to talk in a speech about removing obstacles, but less easy to remove them in practice. What is more, most of the problems of which we are aware do not stem from the Commission but from the Member States and even the regions.
What, then, is the state of play regarding the financial problems? Mrs Pack, you are witness to the fact that the Commission and Parliament had agreed between themselves to request more money because they knew very well that the Erasmus grants were not enough and that only those who received help from their parents or grandparents or who worked during their Erasmus studies had the opportunity of benefiting from these Erasmus grants. All right, what was given was given. You have to make do. That is why I have asked the ministers, since they have not given me any more money, to ensure that supplements to the Erasmus grants are offered in their countries, and this is something we are discussing.
Last Saturday, I was in Paris for a Council of Ministers for Education, exclusively on the issue of mobility. Things are moving, and not just in the abstract. The rapporteur quoted President Chirac’s words on mobility. The French Presidency wishes to make mobility one of the key issues of its term of office, and will go on to do just that. In November, the Ministers of Education are going to take a decision not only on this recommendation, which is a small step in the right direction, but also on an action plan to be implemented in order to facilitate mobility and turn this into a reality. At the Council meeting in Nice, mobility will be one of the items for discussion. So you see, things are moving. Not everything needs to be seen in negative terms, because there is a lot of progress. I would say to you, however, that, for things to continue to move, some pressure needs to be exerted. So, help me to apply some pressure. You are doing so today and will do so tomorrow. I should like to thank you right now for doing this.
I should also like to say that the French Presidency is not the only one to have made progress in this area. The Portuguese Presidency did a marvellous and very useful job of preparing the ground, and I should like to pay tribute to both Presidencies for the way they wish to make progress. The Lisbon Summit was something of a point of departure for a long journey which we are only just beginning. Our Heads of State and of Government and the regional and national governments have realised that education has a role to play if we want to develop the economic and social sides of the European Union. The creation of a Europe of knowledge is therefore a very important step in the right direction, but we still have a very long way to go. I have no hesitation in telling you that we shall do more than just talk. We shall take practical steps, but it cannot happen overnight. We have to keep chipping persistently away at the issue and never give up applying the pressure. However, we shall get there.
With regard to the amendments, the following may be accepted: 4, 5, 11, 12, 16 to 18, 25 to 27, 28, 30, 31, 33 to 38, 40, 41, 44, 52, 53, 54 and 55. I am also able to accept the following amendments, as reworded: 7, 9, 13, 20, 23, 29, 32, 42, 52 and 57 on the basis of the English text. And, finally, I am able to retain the following amendments in part: 6, 10, 15, 19, 21, 22, 24 and 42. That is almost all of them.
Let us now turn to the amendments which present problems. These concern researchers. Ever since the beginning, it has been more or less clear that researchers could not be part of the recommendation. However, as is its proper role, Parliament has exerted pressure for researchers to be included in the text nonetheless. The Commission has responded to Parliament, and these problems were tackled in a communication adopted on 18 January on the European Research Area and, in the follow-up to this communication, Commissioner Busquin will be presenting a communication on the mobility of researchers. There will therefore be a specific communication on this subject, and I think it is partly thanks to the pressure exerted by Parliament that this is going to happen."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples