Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-10-23-Speech-3-049"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20021023.1.3-049"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Mr President, there is a saying in the United Kingdom that you should not 'spoil the ship for a ha'porth of tar'. I think we would all do well to remember that in the coming weeks. The financial arrangements are going to be difficult to agree and I do not underestimate them, but we must keep a sense of perspective. The money for the candidate countries up to 2006 represents one thousandth of the GDP of the EU and is 10% of what Germany has spent on its own unification. The costs are nothing compared to the economic benefits that will flow from enlargement. The costs are nothing compared to the costs of not enlarging and are nothing compared to the costs of trying to maintain the stability of the continent by other means.
The original six Member States would do well to remember why they formed the Community in the first place and the economic benefits that flow from it. Those of us that joined later should remember why we joined and the efforts that other countries made to integrate us successfully into the Union. We should remember the economic benefits that have flowed to us from EU membership. We should all remember that the financial and human effort needed to construct today's Union was the most efficient investment ever made on such a scale by countries of a whole continent. Now is the time to bring that investment up to an entirely new level for the future.
I am concerned that this debate seems to be taking it for granted that the ten countries are already in, when they are not. We in Parliament have to give our assent and we will scrutinise the final treaties very closely. It is vital that the candidate countries maintain their efforts to come up to the required standards. We welcome the three-fold safeguards set out by the Commission in the form of economic safeguards, internal market safeguards and justice and home affairs safeguards. But we expect Parliament to be involved if these safeguard clauses are ever invoked.
We also welcome the Commission's proposal for a further progress report six months before accession. We must all be prepared, if that report is negative on any particular country, to take the appropriate action. The Socialist Group will also be monitoring the social component of enlargement, because we must make sure that enlargement makes things better for people and not worse.
If I could turn to Kaliningrad, Mr Haarder mentioned negotiations with Russia. Could I gently remind Mr Haarder that Russia is not a Member State of the European Union, nor is it a candidate country. I should also remind you that many of the problems in Kaliningrad are of Russia's own making, not least the refusal to allow many countries to set up consulates there. They cannot have a veto on the future of the EU. What we must respect absolutely is Lithuania's sovereignty in this matter. Nor must we try to find solutions with negative historical connotations, such as train corridors. We must also ensure that whatever solution is reached is practical and that we are prepared to give financial and other support to enable Lithuania and Poland to enforce it.
The Irish referendum taught us one important lesson. The 'no' vote actually stayed the same, the difference was in the 'yes' vote, and this was the result of the positive engagement by politicians with their people. In preparation for enlargement, we all have a responsibility to engage with our electorates to ensure that they welcome enlargement and recognise the benefits rather than worry about the costs."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples