Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-10-26-Speech-3-142"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20051026.17.3-142"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
".
Mr President, colleagues, it is a very great pleasure to be with you this afternoon, here in the European Parliament in Strasbourg. Let me add my words of welcome to our colleagues from Ukraine. If we should ever feel lacking in confidence about Europe and its values, then the interest of people such as our Ukrainian friends should tell us that the values of Europe are strong and are much envied by so much of the rest of the world.
The first thing we want to do at the informal summit is to get that paper agreed and make that the basis for the discussion we then have about Europe, its social model and its economic future. However, we also want to add some specific areas of future priorities for European work. I should like to mention some of those.
In respect of these areas of future work, we are also, as the Presidency, publishing some papers today from academics within the European Union on certain aspects of the challenge we face in each of those areas. Those will be published and available to Members of Parliament and people attending the summit tomorrow. But what are the new priority areas we should be thinking of?
First of all, there is research and development, and innovation. We need to make sure that more of the European budget is spent on those priority areas, because those are the future areas for the European economy.
We also need to coordinate better the way in which we work in these areas. We propose specifically a European research council that is the equivalent of the American National Science Foundation, that will support the funding of research and development projects and give us the chance in Europe to be forming the world-beating companies in the technologies of the future.
So, one major area for future priority work is research and development. The second area is energy and energy policy. I believe it is time to develop within Europe a common European energy policy.
For far too long we have been in the situation where, in a haphazard and random way, energy needs and energy priorities are simply determined by each country according to its needs, but without any sense of the collective power that we could have in Europe, if we were prepared to pool our energy and our resources. That policy should focus not on new regulatory barriers, but rather on obtaining a genuinely open energy market. It should deal with, for example, a properly integrated European Union grid. Already this is done on a bilateral basis between countries. Think of how much greater economic power and competitiveness we could have, if we were prepared to make sure that it was integrated on a Europe-wide basis.
Secondly, we, like other major countries in the world, should be prepared to enter into dialogue at European level with key suppliers of energy, to use our collective weight to make our voice heard. Thirdly, we need to be developing clean technologies, energy efficiency and coming to some common views at least about the possibilities and perspectives on issues related to areas such as nuclear power.
I thought certain things might get a mixed reception.
These are areas we need to work on in future.
The third area concerns universities. Let us be clear about the situation in Europe today. Our university sector is not competing in the way it needs to with America. China and India are developing their university sector in an extraordinary way. Looking not just at the spending of our tertiary education sector, but also where we are getting the value-added in the connection between business and university, we do not have anything like the same possibilities in Europe that they have in other parts of the world.
Our proposal is that we task the Commission specifically to report back to the European Council next year on the challenge facing European universities, how we compete with the United States, how we get more public-private partnership into sustaining them and more graduate schools linking business and the academic world across the European Union.
There is a fourth area I would like to suggest for priority work, and that is how we control migration, but also use it to boost the effectiveness and competitiveness of the European economy. We need both to make sure that we have the proper controls on illegal immigration at the same time as recognising that controlled migration can actually bring a benefit to our European economies.
One of the papers that we published today is a paper from a French academic, Patrick Weil, who has also been an adviser to politicians in France, which points out how, ironically, those countries that have opened their labour market to those from the accession countries – the accession ten – have actually benefited economically from that opening up. We need to take those lessons further.
The fifth area concerns the need to make far greater progress on what I might call the demographic or work/life balance issues. Now here it is not appropriate for the European Union to be engaged in substantial bouts of extra regulation and so on, but here is where the open method of coordination could work properly, in things like work/life balance, childcare and provision for people to be able to raise their family and work at the same time, in how we get the best practice in pension and social security systems across Europe. This would be sensible if we are looking at how we can modernise the European economy.
My purpose in coming here today is to report back on what we intend over these coming weeks to be the basis of the UK Presidency. I have with me Douglas Alexander, who is our Europe Minister, and after I have left he will stay to answer more questions – especially the difficult questions!
The final area of priority work concerns what was called by the European Commission the globalisation fund. I just want to make one thing very clear about this idea. The important thing about the globalisation fund is that it should not be a fund that protects companies that need to restructure, or failing companies, or one that bails out companies that cannot succeed. What it should do, however, is protect and help people in circumstances where restructuring has made them redundant or left them facing difficulties within the labour market. To take an example from the UK recently, where thousands of people were made redundant at the Rover works: we did not stop the restructuring, because, I’m afraid, it was economically necessary, even though tragic for the individuals involved. However, we provided real help with retraining, re-skilling and finding new jobs for the workforce in order to protect not the job but the individual. Such a fund, if it is done in the proper way, will help rather than hinder us in meeting the challenge of globalisation.
What we want to propose at the informal Council tomorrow is that we should agree the basic direction in the Commission paper and then, in the six areas of work I have just outlined, that we should set out how we can make progress in each of those areas in order to enhance the competitiveness of the European Union and also its social solidarity in helping people adjust to the challenge of globalisation.
In addition, tomorrow, arising out of the special Council that we had on 13 July, we want to propose measures for a counter-terrorism strategy in order to get agreement to those measures at the December Council. Those should focus on things like the radicalisation of people inside the European Union, the protection of our infrastructure and, in particular, how we exchange information and protection more effectively, how we retain that, how we get cooperation between the different security and police services inside the European Union in order to protect our people better and, as the Home Secretary, Charles Clarke, said to you when he was here in the European Parliament, we are happy to deal with this under the first pillar, so that it can be part of the codecision-making process.
If we can agree that tomorrow, then I believe that we have the beginnings, at least, of the right context in which we can get a financing deal.
In addition to these other issues, there are outstanding dossiers, and let me just say a word about those now. On the working time directive, I hope we can reach agreement under the United Kingdom presidency – we will certainly try to do that. In respect of the services directive, we know the position taken by the European Parliament; I still, however, hope that it is possible to get political agreement on the right way forward, because – and I say this in all sincerity – the services directive is a necessary part of completing the single market and it is important for Europe.
I decided to come to the European Parliament today and was unable to attend the British Parliament – this is a sort of reminder, so thank you for that!
I would like specifically to say – and this may get me into further trouble – to the President of the Commission, whom I congratulate on the work that he has done over the past few months, that Commissioner Verheugen’s proposals on deregulation are an important indicator that Europe is prepared to regulate where it is in the interests of its citizens, but prepared also to deregulate where it is necessary for our competitiveness.
This will be giving our Ukrainian colleagues an excellent example of what a modern democracy is all about!
When we come to the December Council, it is our intention to do our level best to reach a financing deal. I want to make it quite clear and I know from conversations I have had with Members from the accession countries that for all of us the European budget is important. As we know in Britain, there are major issues that arise in connection with it. However, we should remember – that is, we, the 15 Members of the European Union as was, some time ago – that for the ten accession countries, this is of fundamental importance to them. I acknowledge our responsibility, as the Presidency, to do our level best to reach agreement. I hope we can do that, whatever the particular level of the budget may be.
I would also like to make one other point. If we are to get a budget agreement – and I know that people want it in the European Parliament and they want it in the European Council, too – we will be in a better position to do so if we have agreed an economic direction and new priorities for work, and if those can then influence the outcome of that budget debate. That budget debate has to make a start in this financing deal, in reordering the priorities, and it has to be able – through the review process – to give us a forward perspective of a more rational way to spend the European budget in today’s world.
If we want our economy to meet the future challenges, at some point we have got to make sure that the budget is aligned with the economic priorities of our citizens and of our business and of our workforce.
Finally, on external relations, in respect of climate change you will know that we had successful agreements with China and India, as well as Russia, on the issue of how to take forward a proper dialogue on climate change. In particular, I would commend to you the coal demonstration plant with near-zero emissions that we have agreed with China for Europe to build. That could be an important signal for the future. I am perfectly happy, in response to questions, to say more about climate change in a moment.
In addition, we hope we can get agreement at the December Council on an Africa strategy. Europe can be proud of what we have done in respect of development, but the truth is we need to do more. We also, incidentally, for these reasons hope to secure a successful outcome to the WTO negotiations in Hong Kong.
On the question of defence, it is just worth pointing out that, when we began the process of European defence, people were very sceptical. Today we have nine different European missions around the world undertaken by European forces and that shows that European defence can indeed work. Of course, we have had the accession negotiations with Turkey and Croatia opening. Our aim therefore is to get the following things done: agreement on a new economic direction; new priorities for European work in areas like research and development, energy, universities, migration, demography and so on; and a future financing deal that is fair, begins to address those priorities and gives the future prospect of being able substantially to reorder the European budget. We also want a set of conclusions in the area of justice and home affairs that allows us to combat terrorism and illegal immigration, whilst taking the benefits of proper managed migration. We want to take forward our defence, particularly the common defence policy, in areas like strategic airlift and air-to-air refuelling.
We want to get clear conclusions in December on a development strategy for Europe in respect of Africa and to make sure that we keep to a strong process of change in order to combat greenhouse gas emissions and the environmental challenge we face.
However, I shall be here I am pleased to say for at least an hour and a half to hear both your comments and to answer some of those questions myself.
We came to the point a few months ago where, as a result of the ‘no’ votes in the referendums, there was a sense that Europe was in paralysis. If we want to get Europe moving again and in the correct direction, then we have to agree both what that direction is and the specific measures to get us there.
If we are able, in the course of these next few weeks, to offer at least some explanation and answers to our citizens on how we meet the challenge of globalisation, how we provide greater security in an era of global terrorism and mass migration, and how we can have a foreign policy that uses Europe’s collective weight for the benefit of the citizens of Europe, then we will at least have made a start on putting Europe back together again, on the right track and moving forward.
No one Presidency can achieve all of that, but if we can achieve what we set out here, I think it will be significant.
I came here today in order to report back both on what we had done and what we intend to do over the next few weeks. I can tell you we intend to report back again and make sure you are kept constantly in touch with the deliberations within the Council.
If I may end on this point, it is important that we make sure that, in addressing these challenges, the European Commission, the European Parliament and the European Council work together and work together closely. That is our desire. As is obvious from the debates you have and the debates we have with you, we are not always in agreement. But to return to the point I made at the very beginning, it is also obvious from those up in the gallery watching our proceedings that Europe has an immense amount to be proud of and it is time we showed our citizens that the next fifty years can be as good as the last.
I would also like to explain at the very outset how we want to take forward the Presidency over these coming weeks. On 23 June in Brussels, we set out an essential vision of how we should combat the challenge of globalisation. I think it is agreed generally in Europe that we need to get Europe moving and we need to get it moving in the right direction. The question is how we do that.
We now have an opportunity, both in the informal summit, which is tomorrow, and then in the formal summit in December, to set out that direction and put in place the specific policies to match it. So, over these two summits, our idea is first to agree on the right direction for Europe economically, then, secondly, to set out some new priority areas for European action and then, thirdly, on the basis and in the context of that, to get a budget deal in December at the formal Council.
I shall first of all come to the informal summit. This is what I want to come out of this informal summit. The first thing is that I want to get that informal summit to agree effectively on the Commission paper presented by President Barroso and the European Commission. That Commission paper is an analysis of the challenge of globalisation and how we meet it, both as Member States and as the European Union.
I have to say that it is a stark analysis, but it is the right analysis. It shows just how great a competitive challenge we have from the emerging economies such as China and India, never mind the United States and others. It shows how important it is we deal with the almost 20 million unemployed people in the European Union. It shows how we must make our labour markets less restrictive, how we have to make sure, in the field of research and development, innovation and other areas, that we catch up with the best practice in the world. It shows how in areas like energy – where after all we are going to be importing within the next few years something like 90% of our oil and gas needs – Europe has to up its game considerably, and it shows also the enormous demographic challenge that we will face, with fewer people of working age, more people in retirement, and more people therefore needing to work. As a result, issues such as work/life balance and how we allow people both to raise their families and to work in the workplace are all the more crucial."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples