Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-02-14-Speech-3-038"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2001-02-14"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Accession partnership with Turkey2
dcterms:Language	"de"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20010214.2.3-038"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2001-02-14-Speech-3-0392
lpv:speaker	lp:Ursula Stenzel2
lpv:spokenAs	substitute; EMPL (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 chair; Delegation to the EU-Poland Joint Parliamentary Committee (1999-07-22--2002-01-14)3 member_of_the_bureau; EPP-ED (1999-10-12--2004-07-19)3 unknown; Österreichische Volkspartei (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 substitute; Delegation to the EU-Lithuania Joint Parliamentary Committee (1999-10-08--2002-01-14)3 member; Conference of Delegation Chairs (1999-07-22--2002-01-14)3 member; Committee on Foreign Affairs, Human Rights, Common Security and Defence Policy (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3
lpv:translated text	". Mr President, now that the Helsinki European Council has confirmed Turkey's status as a candidate for accession which must fulfil the same criteria as the other candidate countries, it is logical that Turkey should also benefit from a pre-accession strategy and an Accession Partnership. The Swoboda report is one outcome of the Helsinki decision and is therefore important. Let me repeat, the issue is not "whether" there should be an Accession Partnership and pre-accession strategy, but "how". In one respect, the Swoboda report goes far beyond the Commission's proposal in that it calls for Turkey to be included in the ISPA and SAPARD financial instruments. This would have two consequences. Firstly, the ISPA and SAPARD financial instruments would have to be cut back, and secondly, the Berlin financial agreement would have to be cancelled. Both are highly unlikely scenarios. On the other budgetary aspects, I go along with the Swoboda report. I also think it is important that there should be no discrimination against Turkey. But SAPARD and ISPA are designed for transformation societies which are evolving from a communist planned economy to what is hopefully a social market economy. And of course this does not apply to Turkey. The purpose of the pre-accession strategy and Accession Partnership must be to achieve convergence between Turkey's political, economic and social conditions and the EU. It is essential that all candidates for accession are treated equally. But this does not require any additional resources, e.g. from PHARE, ISPA or SAPARD; it requires the same procedures as apply to the distribution of PHARE funding. I therefore call once more for Amendment No 1 of the Swoboda report to be rejected."@en1
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata	"(Applause)"1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph