Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-12-14-Speech-3-022"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20051214.6.3-022"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, I have just learnt something this morning: even on a cold December morning, a May-time atmosphere can develop in a room, and I can suddenly see a spirit of revolt arise against the Council and against the governments. I find that very, very interesting.
I would now like to say something about two things that strike me as important in this connection. Earlier on in this debate, reference was made to Iran. Mr Poettering is right to say that what is said by that country’s President touches and affects us all. If, though, we are going to think about what to do about him, then I have an idea. The fact of the matter, whether we like it or not, is that he is an elected President! At present, the only effective way to get this discussed at last, would seem to be to consider the possibility or otherwise of excluding Iran from the World Cup. That would spark off debate in Iran, and the debate would be a serious one. Bread and circuses on the one hand, and everyone on the other being able to do and say what they like is something I regard as inconsistent. It is that sort of debate that would bring home to people in Iran the reality of what their leadership is currently doing – cutting them off from the world! If people are being cut off, that needs to be said and there must be no illusions about it. This is also something that one might suggest that the Council Presidency might discuss, along with, ultimately, the war on terrorism.
Fighting against terrorism cannot mean fighting against democracy. Do you understand? It cannot mean fighting against democracy. Having heard about the events involving the CIA here in Europe, I can tell you that this is not about fighting terrorists; this is about creating the conditions for bigotry. We must stop the wrong fight against terrorism. If you want to fight terrorists, please, come back to the rule of law and then you will have us, the Greens, on your side.
Mr President, Mr Alexander, you spoke of Mr Blair’s eloquence. I, on the other hand, would say that it is the inadequacy of the UK Presidency that is eloquent. It is extraordinary, and if the policy you are proposing to us is truly on a par with the manner in which you exploit this Parliament and the European institutions when you need them – I am talking about data retention, which you cannot arrange for your own Parliament to approve, because you have the obligation and the duty to go via ours – if this is how you conceive of Europe, then I have one thing to say to you: not only will you fail – I do not care whether the UK Presidency fails – but Europe will also fail, and that is dangerous.
On the subject of the financial perspective: when you speak of reform proposals and of your desire to reform agriculture, you are, in reality, cutting funding for the development of rural areas. These are the most modern aspects of our budget that you want to sacrifice!
Hold your applause; I fear that you will find less to applaud in what I am about to say.
You said something extraordinary: we need to be modern – there will be less applause heading my way right now – and yet what are you proposing to us? Nuclear energy! This is an energy source from the past, from the 1960s! Do not stay in the 1960s. Modernity means something else, namely hydrogen. You have not understood a thing, and that is what is dangerous. When a presidency has not understood a thing, it does just about anything.
I would now like to say that in German, so that Mr Poettering and Mr Schulz can get my drift. One thing is true: say to your governments what you have said to the Presidency today! The fact of the matter is that these miserly governments, to which Mr Watson has already referred, and who do exactly what the Council wants of them, are part of the problem. Tell Mr Steinbrück that things cannot go on the way they are! In the days when the Greens were in government, I told them to make things public! This finance minister’s aspirations are a scandal! Likewise, I have this to say to Mrs Grossetête:
Tell Mr Chirac too: the defence of French agricultural policy, such as it is, is a scandal that does not help us make progress.
It is not only the Presidency that bears responsibility for what happens, although it does share in it through being every bit as feeble and poor as the other governments in the Council. It is not one whit better than any of them, but the governments that they represent are part of the problem, too. Not when they are in here, but when they are out there, they form part of a total artwork called the Council – and what a total work of art that is!"@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples