Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2004-04-01-Speech-4-026"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20040401.2.4-026"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, I have asked for permission to speak because your President and Conference of Presidents have asked me, as a matter of urgency, to go to them now. I find it difficult to be in the plenary and with the Conference of Presidents simultaneously. I hope you will understand that this must be my last contribution, and that I must then comply with your President’s request.
I have four brief comments to make. The first is that the adoption of Community law is what accession negotiations are about; it is not a precondition for them taking place. That is why many of the rapporteurs were quite right in what they said, and, indeed, our progress reports say the same thing, but that cannot now be used to justify our saying that we cannot start negotiating with Turkey because they have not yet done those things about which we are going to be negotiating. That is, unfortunately, an inherent contradiction.
I also have to point out to Mrs Sommer that it is simply not true to say, as she does, that the Turks are asking for more and more money whilst not taking any action. I surely ought to know if Turkey were asking for more money; it is not. On the contrary the truth – shameful as it is – is that the European Union was unable to deliver on its financial commitments to Turkey. That is the truth of the matter.
Let me turn to the issue of the possible effects of Turkish accession on the Community system, which is, I would like to say, one of the most important issues of all. The idea of conducting a specific study into this is one that I regard as particularly important and interesting. I, too, am persuaded that this should be done, and we have already started to give some thought to the possible scope for such a project. It is also important, though, that we should know what accession would ultimately mean for the EU by the time any decision is taken on whether or not to start negotiating.
I cannot do other than agree with all those who have made it abundantly clear that changes have to be reflected in reality. I have said the same thing over and over again to the Turkish Prime Minister during the long breaks in negotiations at Bürgenstock in Switzerland over the past few days. He is familiar with the problem, and I told him that the implementation of reforms must have reached such a critical mass by the end of this year that we can regard the process of implementation as credible and sustainable. If it is not, then we will hardly be able to come to the conclusion that the political criteria have been fulfilled.
I would also like to highlight what Mr Brok said about perseverance in the reform process, which is the most important thing of all. As you will be aware, I favour a debate on the fundamental question of whether or not Turkey’s accession should happen at all – one that, although contentious, would be conducted frankly and without any prejudice whatever. All I ask, as I always do, is that, in all that we say and in the way we conduct our debate, we should not undermine what the reformers in Turkey are doing. Whatever we think about Turkey, there is one thing on which we must agree, and that is that it is in our fundamental interests that Turkey should become democratic, subject to the rule of law and stable, that it should become a steadfast and reliable partner for the European Union. That is true in any case, and that is why the reform process must continue.
Let me conclude by returning, briefly, to Cyprus: all the issues raised in the Oostlander Report concerning Turkish responsibility for Cyprus will be resolved as soon as the Annan plan is accepted. There will then be a solution, and so all the issues will no longer be relevant and will pass away. I get the impression that what now counts most of all, in fact, is to persuade the Greek Cypriot community that the plan that has been devised, the latest plan to be on the table – and there will not be another – is in their interests too. To do so demands a really high degree of leadership and strength of political will. While I am perfectly willing to make available to your House and to its committees all the information that we have, I have to point out that no changes can be made to the plan; all that we can do now is to consider it very carefully and evaluate it for ourselves, but nothing more can be changed. That is the answer I wanted to give you. I really do apologise for being unable, for once, to be present for the whole debate, but I have told you the reason why, and I ask for your understanding."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples