Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-04-04-Speech-3-009"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20010404.2.3-009"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Madam President, honourable Members of the European Parliament, I would like to give my and the presidency’s picture of the summit in Stockholm. The meeting comprised two parts; firstly, a follow-up to the Lisbon Process and secondly, discussions on the Union’s foreign relations. There was also a brief discussion of agricultural policy. I will begin by commenting on the Lisbon Process.
The question of European airspace will once more be addressed in Gothenburg in June. We have made progress in this discussion and in this field, too, I am hopeful that we will have reached an agreement on
before the Swedish Presidency is over.
In the field of finance we will also achieve implementation of the directive on the internal market in national legislation such that 98.5 percent of the directive will be adopted before 2002.
We will also start a new WTO round. We have emphasised the importance of making all the work linked to
Europe more secure. We also said in Stockholm that we will proceed with the Galileo project. This is important. There are still certain things which need to be clarified, for example concerning finance, but we consider this a socially beneficial project which must be carried out and as quickly as possible. Our transport ministers will be discussing the issue further tomorrow.
We also decided that the distorting state aids in the internal market must be reduced by 2003 at the latest. A
is to be set up for this and made available for all.
This is primarily what was addressed in the discussions on economic issues in Stockholm. As I said earlier, it is a step in the right direction but not as far as we would like to get. This is a process and the direction in which the process is going is incontrovertible. It is that aspect of the Lisbon Process that concerns the economy.
The second aspect of the process is the social agenda. The Europe which is developing is not a Europe which can only be built by deregulating markets. Instead, there must also be an expression of political will to distribute the growing welfare available in Europe in a fair manner so that our citizens can live a rich life. Achieving a balance between economic liberalisation and social responsibility in the conclusions of the meeting in Stockholm has been an aim on the part of the Swedish Presidency.
In terms of the social aspect, a new goal for employment has been set: it is primarily important that we concentrate on those aged over 55 in the European labour force. By the year 2010, 50 percent of this group must be employed, compared with the present 38 percent. We have a new intermediate target for the general employment rate in 2005, namely 67 percent overall and 57 percent for women.
By 2052 we are to have sufficient childcare in Europe to contribute to a social agenda which will enable young men and women to combine responsibility for a professional career with responsibility for the family and children.
In terms of equal opportunities we seek to create not only a social Europe but also a modern Europe. Discriminatory pay differences are to be combated. Indicators for this will therefore be produced to make these differences visible. The Equal Opportunities Directive will be adopted and made more stringent this year, which is also a result of the Stockholm Council.
In order to create quality in work, whereby people are able to remain longer in their jobs without being forced into early retirement, workplaces need to be developed so that people who are not in complete health or not completely capable can also find a place in the world of work. Moving from a situation of European mass unemployment to a trend which involves a lack of labour, and the question of whether it will be possible to achieve continued economic growth demand that we exploit all the experiences mature, older people have to offer. The quality of workplaces must also be developed. The following issues are important to consider: lifelong learning, equal opportunities between men and women, the way in which we treat all those who have come to Europe in recent years, possibly as refugees, i.e. combating segregation and discrimination in the workplace as well.
The summit in Lisbon provided a powerful direction for the Union in creating a competitive, world-leading, dynamic economy with social cohesion. At the summit in Stockholm, we added four different areas to the Lisbon Process. The first concerns demographic development in Europe which will have a major impact on the social agenda which must be formulated for Europe. This demographic challenge will gradually bring with it anxiety regarding national finances and a lack of labour. Rising to this challenge is a joint necessity for all fifteen Member States. Much work will be required, particularly in the social sphere. This can also be linked to the social agenda which the French Presidency so successfully launched in Nice. The demographic issues will therefore be added to the Lisbon Process.
In Gothenburg we will also return to an initial evaluation of European pension systems. Is this something which places a burden on normal wage earners, white collar and blue collar workers, is it just a question of whether one has a secure income on retirement? How can we address European pension systems in a situation where we are seeing fewer and fewer people of working age and more and more pensioners? Within the framework of open coordination this too should be something which we discuss together. We will return to this in Gothenburg.
The social agenda has thus been developed and in this way these two aspects form a whole: on the one hand, economic liberalisation and modernisation, on the other, social responsibility and solidarity. These come together in a policy which will make Europe the most competitive, dynamic and socially cohesive region in the world. This is our vision.
That is what was addressed concerning the Lisbon Process at the summit. Alongside the Lisbon Process we discussed foreign relations. This primarily concerned four issues. Firstly, our relations with Russia. President Putin was invited to take part and met the group of 15 Heads of State or Government in face to face discussions. While President Putin was meeting us, foreign minister Ivanov met the foreign ministers. Naturally, we reiterated our concern over the developments in Chechnya and other phenomena in Russian society which we find unacceptable. Our main discussion, however, concerned financial development in Russia and opportunities for economic cooperation between Russia and the European Union.
Some concrete results were achieved: firstly we are opening up opportunities for an EIB loan to Russia. While this is naturally limited, it is a breakthrough in terms of environmental initiatives.
Secondly, we will give Russia all possible support in its preparations for WTO membership. Membership of the WTO will open up the Russian market to fair competition as well as create opportunities for resolving long-standing trade conflicts between EU Member States and Russia. We will give Russia every support in this process.
Thirdly, we said that we will actively participate in the upcoming anniversary celebrations in St Petersburg in 2003. St Petersburg is a stunning European city which is once more regaining its former beauty and certainly also its position in European cooperation. This is a clear signal from the European Union that this is also our concern. This was addressed during the discussion with President Putin. I would like to emphasise that discussion primarily focused on financial issues but naturally we repeated our concern over developments in Chechnya.
We were also visited by President Trajkovski of the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, FYROM. He was invited more as a gesture of solidarity. When we, the Heads of State or Government, were meeting, it was natural for us, given the crisis developing in Macedonia at that time, to meet him and express our solidarity, but also to emphasise the importance of the various population groups in FYROM being treated in such a way that they all feel they have a place in society and a right to participate and be present. We also emphasised the importance of avoiding violence, while the foreign ministers were able to present concrete proposals regarding aid. This is part of a Balkan strategy. This April we will have the Stabilisation Agreement with FYROM ready for signing. This will be followed by a similar agreement with Croatia. This shows that the Union is playing a role in the Balkans and that a future is now beginning to dawn also for people living in the Balkans. The President’s visit was an expression of our commitment in the Balkans.
I was also appointed by my colleagues to travel to the Korean peninsula. The background to this is that we wish to express support for the process of reconciliation and détente now under way there. After all, this is the last major conflict remaining from the Cold War and the aftermath of the Second World War causing incredible suffering for those involved and major risks also from a military perspective. If there is anything we can do to speed up the process and support it, this must naturally be our common goal. In this area, too, the Union was able to join forces around shared principles and common involvement in appointing me on behalf of the Union together with Javier Solana and Chris Patten to travel there at some point during the next six months and confer directly with political leaders in both the North and the South about the process, about human rights, about détente and disarmament.
The fourth foreign policy question which was discussed was the situation in the Middle East, which is ever present in the minds of all politically involved Europeans. The Middle East is our neighbour. We have an
responsibility for ensuring that the peace process gets back on its feet. In that sense peace and security cannot be separated. War, conflict and destruction in the Middle East are matters which also affect us. All of us in the Union, whatever country we live in, have a deep personal involvement in this part of the world. The Union’s Member States have excellent bilateral relations with the region and often with both sides of the conflict. On the other hand, the Union has not so far played any major role in taking the initiative towards finding solutions to the conflict or for various types of measure for dealing with the suffering which people in the Middle East are experiencing in their day-to-day lives.
In Stockholm we asked Javier Solana to report back by the Gothenburg Summit, if not earlier, on how the Union can increase and improve its work in this area, and how the Union can contribute to restarting the peace process – naturally ideally together with the US, but always on the basis of the fact that it is the parties in the conflict which have to make an appeal, a request for participation. It is not inconceivable that such an appeal will come. When it does the Union must also be prepared to take on its responsibility. So these were the four questions on the international agenda – a way of practically, but without a great deal of fuss, expressing a common foreign policy for the Union.
Secondly: biotechnology. In Lisbon the emphasis was on information technology. We do not wish to drop this – it will continue to be important – but we must also add biotechnology if we are to be an area and a part of the world at the forefront of economic development. This question must therefore also become a priority issue for the Union. We must not flinch at the difficult moral and ethical issues linked to this technology. Our discussions must address these too.
Madam President, naturally we also discussed the situation facing European agriculture. We expressed solidarity with those affected, we expressed faith in the veterinary authorities and the ability of our agriculture ministers to handle the situation, we emphasised the importance of safe food and we said that the European budget in this context is already fixed or locked. In Stockholm, as Heads of State or Government, we were not in a position to debate the question of agricultural policy. We believe that our agriculture ministers have already done so. Preparations are also under way ahead of 2003 for a review of European agricultural policy. In light of this there was no reason for us to hold a major debate but we wish to express solidarity with those affected and, naturally, also show that we are aware that we have agriculture ministers, veterinary authorities and the Commission, who are doing excellent work in this context.
Finally, we also addressed the situation in the climate negotiations. It is unacceptable for any party to pull out of the Kyoto negotiations.
(
)
The Kyoto negotiations are the instrument we have for addressing the change in fundamental living conditions that the climate represents. When we see primarily the US sending this signal, as far as we are concerned it is not possible to accept it. Together with the President of the Commission I have written to the US President and expressed our concern. At the moment, the Swedish Environment Minister is in the US together with the Commissioner for the Environment before continuing on to Iran, Japan and China for discussions there. We therefore will be well placed to emphasise the declaration which the European Council adopted in Stockholm as an annex to its conclusions repeating our commitment to the Kyoto Protocol. It is thus this process which we must keep to.
In brief, that is what was discussed at the Stockholm Summit, a meeting which, in some ways, once more became everyday life for the Union. We addressed issues concerning people in their day-to-day lives. We have had an intensive period with a great deal of internal responsibilities. The French Presidency successfully resolved questions on the future decision making and responsibilities of the Union. Now we are highlighting that perspective again and focusing on things which concern people directly in their day-to-day lives. We did not achieve success in every area but there is no doubt as to the direction in which the Union is moving. That is the way things are when politics are at their best: we compromise, take gradual steps forwards and achieve results. This has also been the ambition of the Swedish Presidency.
Furthermore, I am confident that the Spanish Presidency, which will be addressing this follow-up work next spring, will make further strides. In this way we will create the Union we have dreamed of, a union which is dynamic, successful and which holds together socially. We recognise that we will not survive without taking into account ecological conditions.
The third point we are adding is that we wish to see a link between social development, financial development and ecological development. That is to say, we cannot have sustainable social cohesion or lasting financial growth if these are not also based upon ecologically balanced social development.
The fourth point we are adding is for the candidate countries to also take part in the Lisbon Process in the future.
These four elements are thus being added but the Lisbon Process is, of course, just a process, a development. It is therefore important for us to realise that we will not achieve everything in terms of the social agenda and economic liberalisation all at once. This will have to take place gradually. The guidelines have been set and have once more been confirmed by the European Council in Stockholm. Our focus is full employment and active welfare states.
With regard to economic liberalisation we took a further step forward in Stockholm. It did not extend as far as the Swedish Presidency would have wished but definite steps were taken in the right direction.
The first issue is the creation of an internal European market for financial services. The first Ecofin meeting in Stockholm was a major breakthrough in the area of financial services and risk capital, which was then confirmed in conjunction with the meeting of the European Council.
We also agreed to proceed further on the directive on postal services. We also agreed that we will abolish the monopoly and open the gas and electricity markets to competition. It is true that we did not achieve the timetable we had hoped for, but this will take place and we emphasise our desire to go down this route. The European Council saw intense debate on the following:
certain Member States open up their gas and electricity markets to competition, will this, in the long term, result in an impossible situation should other Member States refrain from doing so. Should this be the case, we will gradually end up in a situation in which certain companies in monopoly markets are creating profits which will then be used in marketing offensives in other countries which have opened up their markets. This will build in tension in the Union which will be difficult to deal with. It is therefore important that we proceed with the deregulation of the gas and electricity markets as we have proposed in principle, but it must also proceed according to schedule."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
"If"1
"e"1
"enormous"1
"scoreboard"1
"the single European sky"1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples