Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-09-04-Speech-2-073"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2001-09-04"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Progress of the 12 candidate countries in 2000 (continuation)2
dcterms:Language	"da"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20010904.5.2-073"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2001-09-04-Speech-2-0742
lpv:speaker	lp:Jens-Peter Bonde2
lpv:spokenAs	substitute; Delegation to the European Economic Area Joint Parliamentary Committee (EEA) (1999-09-29--2002-01-14)3 member; Delegation for relations with Switzerland, Iceland and Norway (1999-09-28--2002-01-14)3 member; AFCO (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 unknown; JuniBevægelsen (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 chair; EDD (2001-01-30--2004-07-19)3 member; Conference of Presidents (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, the June movement is voting in favour of enlargement, but the agreements must also be so good for the candidate countries that their electorates are inspired to vote in favour. The EU Summit must learn from the referendums in Denmark and Ireland. Given the way in which the enlargement negotiations are at present going, a majority of people in one or more countries is going to vote against. Keeping documents and correspondence secret is a sure way of creating mistrust. People will think that the EU has something to hide when it does not dare to produce documentation. For a couple of years now, I have been trying to obtain a non-bureaucratic electronic copy of the rules the candidate countries have to accept. The Commission still refuses to produce such a document. Why not do voters the service of putting all papers on the Internet so that they can be read in Karup and Prague, Bogense and Budapest? I am not demanding that internal negotiating positions or military secrets be made publicly available. However, papers that are to result in laws must be made available now. We must also discuss whether we are making the correct demands of the candidate countries. Where and when have our people demonstrated in favour of being able to buy cheap land in the countries of Eastern Europe? Might we not offer transitional arrangements concerning agricultural and recreational land until such time as the countries concerned have, for example, 90% of our income? Who in the West has any desire to pay subsidies to people in Eastern Europe whom we are forcing out of their jobs? Might we not allow extended transitional arrangements so that they can adapt to competition in the common market but be allowed to protect local markets until such time as they are more competitive? Might we not be a little more magnanimous and much more flexible? Why not allow the 12 candidate countries to be involved in devising the basis for cooperation in the next treaty? Why not disregard the Treaty of Nice and create a treaty which can be adopted in referendums in all the countries – a treaty in favour of an open, slimmer, freer and more democratic Europe? The prospect of membership would then create enthusiasm among people and increase the turnouts at elections in such a way as to produce large majorities in favour of enlargement. People want to be united instead of divided Let that be the challenge."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph