Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-06-20-Speech-2-012"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20060620.6.2-012"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, let me begin by reporting on what emerged from last week’s European Council. This Council was the logical consequence of our concern that trust should be fostered between the institutions, that Europe be dynamised, and that some practical work be done for its people. It might be said that we did this under the heading of ‘from reflection to action’. This Presidency has opted for, and adopted at the Council, a twin-track approach, which involves, on the one hand, offering a Europe of tangible projects and, on the other, the revival of the constitutional debate, initiating public discussion on the future of Europe and breathing life into it.
The Council reaffirmed the importance of the European Institute for Technology, concerning which the Commission will be submitting a proposal before the end of this year, and the Institute will then be operational by 2009 at the latest. Our enlargement of the eurozone sends a vitally important message to the effect that the zone is open to all new Member States and that it is not some sort of fortress or ‘closed shop’. Slovenia will be joining it, and so the same course is open to all states that have carried out reforms.
I want to say quite frankly, though, that we must not interfere with the criteria. That is my personal view or the opinion of a majority based on the very serious debate we had about the criteria. I also want to be quite frank in telling your House that, if we do, the credibility of one of the most important projects in European integrations is in jeopardy.
We have made a start on the energy policy. An action plan for the 2007 Spring Summit is in preparation, and is intended to ensure security of supply for the consumer, while also having a considerable effect on the environment through the saving of energy and the use of renewables.
I am grateful to the Member States and the Commission for their willingness to go for a new approach to one subject that was of particular personal importance to me. I pressed for a special action programme to deal with rare diseases, particularly those afflicting children, such as, for example, systemic lupus erythematodes, MPS or other rare diseases, which result in terrible pain and in most cases death within a matter of a few years. There are so few patients spread across all the European countries that no effective programmes to help them can be developed on a national basis. The Commission will now play a coordinating role, and the Seventh Framework Programme will develop effective interventions that will bring real added value for the public. I see this as a really important thing to do, particularly since the persons concerned are so seriously affected.
The Spring Summit set in motion a number of important developments in the field of youth unemployment, with opportunities for training and further education, the possibility of every young person finding employment within six months, or, by 2010, within four months. This European Council also saw the sustainability strategy, a completely revised and comprehensive instrument, embodied in a resolution. This environmental compatibility strategy is a quite essential element in the European model for living and is therefore something that we will affirm in the long term.
Let me now turn to the subject of the citizens’ Europe and the constitutional debate itself. One year on from the adverse referendums in the Netherlands and France, it was our task to evaluate them. First, though, we have to allow the period of reflection, which has generally been ridiculed as a pause for reflection, with more pause than reflection, to be completed. That period may have been necessary – for it allowed us to take soundings to gauge how we may proceed – but it is not enough. Reflection is not enough; what we need is action. We also need a very clear timetable for how we move on from here. We also know that new elements need to be incorporated in the text of the Treaty. It is difficult to imagine another vote on the Treaty as it stands, and that is why it needs new elements, although they must not touch upon its substance.
It was important that this distinction be highlighted, and the discussions at the European Council did a good job of that; not one single member of the Council questioned the substance of the constitutional treaty – I shall have more to say about that later on – and that is something I see as one of the major achievements of this period of discussion.
I can tell your House that the German Presidency will therefore, during the first six months of 2007 – the deadline has been deliberately left open – present a report on the state that discussions have reached and on the possible further developments. The new element – and this I say on my own personal responsibility – can be either a name, an interpretation, an annex or a matter of method. That will need to be discussed, but I do believe that the substance must remain unchanged.
For this Summit, we put together, on our own responsibility, a document listing over 30 practical projects, constituting, as a sort of ‘Agenda 2010’, the rich working programme for the EU in the coming years leading up to 2010. At the summit, we also discussed a number of quite specific projects, and some of those discussions have already been brought to a satisfactory conclusion.
Further decisions will be taken on the basis of the report by the German Presidency, and a timetable has been set for them, so that this stage must come to an end by the beginning of the French Presidency at the latest – the earlier the better. It may even be earlier than that, but it must be in the second six months at the latest.
Something very important – and in this we have taken up an idea and a suggestion from Mr Barroso – will be a special meeting of the European Council to celebrate the fiftieth anniversary of the signing of the Treaties of Rome, and this will be held in Berlin on 25 March 2007, on which occasion it is intended that the European social model should be defined in a statement that will be significant in much the same way as, for example, the Declaration of Messina 50 years ago.
During this past six months, we have been able to clarify a number of matters concerning enlargement and also to take it further. Over this period, we have – as the Council Conclusions reiterate – underlined the accession date of 1 January 2007 for Bulgaria and Romania. At an informal meeting specifically for foreign ministers from the Balkans, we have laid down and underlined the prospects for their accession and for that of all the Balkan states. We have made a start on negotiations with Croatia and Turkey, confirmed Macedonia’s status as a candidate, and signed the stabilisation and association agreement with Albania. Following the success of the referendum in Montenegro, we have recognised that country’s independence, and we are now, together with the Serbs, giving consideration to a special plan of action, similar to that for Croatia, which will enable us to offer the Serbian people a perspective at a time of great difficulty for them.
We asked the Commission to define, at this European Council, what is meant by ‘absorption capacity’, and I am quoting the conclusions of the October 2005 Council with regard to the commencement of negotiations with Turkey and Croatia when I describe that as a vitally important condition for the accession of new Member States. That must not be allowed to become a mere rhetorical phrase, but must be a living concept, and one backed up by verifiable criteria. The intention is that this special report should be presented this autumn, simultaneously with the annual progress report on enlargement.
The third topic was how to simplify the Union and make it more efficient and more open. The debate on the future of Europe, the ‘Sound of Europe’, the ‘Europe begins at home’ subsidiarity conference, the upgrading of Europe Day, and the discussions with young people, artists and opinion formers in the Café de l’Europe, saw us, to some degree, breaking new ground. Together with the European Parliament and with the national parliaments, we have staged a very large number of events, and, most importantly, hosted a major informal meeting of foreign ministers in Klosterneuburg, the results of which I can inform you about in brief. In order to further improve working methods and comitology, we worked very hard – as I, at the outset, promised that we would – to get the Council, when acting as legislator in the codecision procedure, to take its decision openly and in public, and actually succeeded in this. It was difficult – and I will be quite honest in admitting that certain Member States were very hesitant about it – but we did accomplish a quite crucial forward movement, and one that your House has consistently demanded.
It is also envisaged that the European Parliament will have a major part to play in the comitology procedure, and, while the practical implications of that are understood by nobody, I do know that this was something to which you attached great importance. Mr Winkler, our Secretary of State, who is sitting behind me, spent veritable hours on end in finding a way in which we could move forward together on this, and I am most warmly appreciative of his efforts. He spent more time in the European Parliament than in Austria.
Most of all, he ensured that your House will have an equal say with the Council in decisions reached under this procedure. What is now needed, of course, is for these provisions to be given practical effect. As regards subsidiarity, we have ensured that the national parliaments are more involved. As regards better – which means less – regulation, we have, in what was another initiative on the part of the Commission and of certain Member States – ensured that we will discuss how we move forward at the 2007 Spring Summit, when it is to be hoped that we will be able to agree on a saving target amounting to a reduction of 25% in administrative expenditure. It is of course the Commission that will submit proposals for this.
As I draw to the close of my remarks, I would like to say something about a number of important contributions to European internal policy. What always matters most to the public, of course, is what the effect is on the creation of jobs, and what I, personally, am happy about – and this is not, of course, something for which the Council can claim credit, but primarily the result of economic trends and also of the Member States’ policies – is that, in June 2006, there are over 2 million more jobs in Europe than there were in June 2005. That is a good result for the new Lisbon Strategy, and one we can show to the world.
Probably the most important of them was the Financial Perspective. It proved possible to conclude negotiations with Parliament on the Interinstitutional Agreement, and so the 2007-2013 Budget is secure. That is a respectable compromise: a total of EUR 4 billion extra for forward-looking programmes, a raised limit for expenditure, and also the setting aside of two Budget positions amounting to EUR 4 billion more: these things correspond exactly with the priorities that Parliament had set.
It also demonstrates that our ambition of creating 10 million more jobs by 2010 is a realistic one if the conditions are right and if we do our homework properly. It was very important to me that we should reinforce national ownership and political responsibility and that we should hold to account the ministers within whose remit the internal market and the implementation of the Lisbon Strategy fall. I have written to all the Member States and talked with their representatives in person. I am glad that we are able to congratulate six more Member States who have appointed as coordinators their ministers for the internal market, one of whom, I might add, is Mr Bangemann, our own Minister for the Economy and Labour, which brings our number up to fifteen. It is to be hoped that the other ten will join us. I would also ask your House to do a bit of advertising for national ownership back home.
Something else that was important was, of course, the research programme; now that the figure has reached EUR 54 billion, there is something like 60% more available in research funding. Small and medium-sized businesses have been strengthened; the European driving licence is up and running; the European infrastructure costs directive has been adopted in these past six months, as have the trans-European networks. Next week – on the last day of the Austrian Presidency – the first ground will be broken for the test tunnel for the Brenner Base Tunnel, which is probably the largest and most important infrastructure project to have been planned – and also co-funded – by Europe. Public local transport, public services and services of general interest are another area where we in the Austrian Presidency have been able to produce a very good consensual solution. In terms of relations with third states, there has of course been the summit meeting with Japan, another one with Russia, and tonight and tomorrow, of course, one with the Americans, about which I am sure I will be able to say something more in the course of debate.
It has to be conceded that, a year ago, there was sadness in the air, and with good reason; the budget had failed, the Constitution was on ice following two failed referendums, and terrorists had detonated bombs on London’s buses and underground railway. The services directive was proving nightmarish, especially for the trade unions and for small and medium-sized businesses, and there were deep chasms between the Member States and one another, between them and the institutions, and – most of all – between the citizens and Europe. I certainly do not wish to claim that all these things have been resolved – far from it – but I do want to say that we are now financially secure for the next seven years. The services directive seems to have sorted itself out to everyone’s satisfaction. In the course of the year, five more Member States have ratified the constitutional treaty and another is due to do so in the autumn, while two others have told this European Council that they are giving consideration to this course of action, and none of them have questioned its substance.
I would like, then, to say a big ‘thank you’ for what Team Europe has done over the past six months, firstly to the European Parliament, where members of the Austrian Government have put in an appearance on over sixty occasions, and our statisticians tell me that this amounts to the highest turnout of all presidencies bar none, but I would like most especially to thank your President, Mr Borrell, for his cooperation, his friendship and for the suggestions he has constantly been making. I would like to thank the group chairmen for the many discussions we have had, whether in the groups themselves, here in your House or in the committees. I would like to assure the Commission of my respect and my friend Mr Barroso of my gratitude, with the same also to Mr Solana, the General Secretary with responsibility for external policy, to the Council Secretariat and, last of all, to my own team. I can say to you quite honestly that it has been for us a real joy and honour to hold the presidency of Europe for six months and to work together with you. You have no cause for fear, for the forthcoming presidencies have, of course, enough to do already.
After all, our anthem is the Ode to Joy, not an ode to sadness, so, as this Austrian Presidency draws to a close, we should simply say:
Let us bring a bit more joy into the work we do. Thank you very much.
The second really important topic was the Services Directive, and this was a clear indication of our ability to reach agreement even on contentious issues. It is with reference to this that I would like to pay your House a particular compliment, for it was your House that in fact showed the way – indeed, it virtually smashed through a wall to create a doorway in so doing – in which a highly contentious issue can be resolved through successful liaison with the social partners. We spent a great deal of time behind the scenes with the two sides of European business and industry, who had been able, for the first time ever, to take part in the Spring European Summit, and I do believe that our cooperation with them was highly successful.
The third topic was the improvement of protection for European citizens when abroad and how to make consular cooperation more efficient. We have now been able to ensure a vast improvement in the coordination of consular offices on the ground, of any teams sent into a crisis zone, and of the deployment of transport when disasters strike. The report by Michel Barnier, which was delivered to me and to Mr Barroso at the beginning of May, has become the basis of a Presidency document that has enabled us to agree on a very precise programme of tasks for the next eight presidencies.
We have also made substantially better progress in our endeavours to set up a single visa centre and implement pilot projects in the transit regions of Ukraine, Belarus and Moldova that are intended to offer the most effective possible protection to asylum-seekers in their own countries. Provided that conditions are fulfilled, it should be possible to add the new Member States to the Schengen area by the end of 2007 or early 2008.
We had cribbed from the Commission the idea of a debate about the direction in which we should be going; the first, at the Spring Summit, had to do with energy, and over dinner at this one we had a free discussion of the issues of integration and migration, at which – although it was Mr Barroso and I who got the debate going, the star was the Spanish Prime Minister, Mr Zapatero, who gave a very interesting presentation on the current problems. I find this sort of free discussion on a new subject unbelievably exciting. This is one of the most important problems of our time, at any rate for the public in the states concerned, and I would also like to thank the Commission for all the considerable help it gives on the ground.
Now, working together with the Member States and with the Commission, we have put in place arrangements for the monitoring of the West African coast, where, at present, at a number of locations, crowds of up to 50 000 people – in many places – wait until the sea is calm and then, in suitable vessels, each equipped with GPS and laden with enough food for a five-day journey, set out for the Canary Islands.
This is an urgent matter, and one to which we cannot close our eyes. It was highly interesting to hear this free debate for the first time, and I agree with Professor Weidenfeld, who has said this in a recent interview: ‘The truth is that Europe is the most vulnerable continent of all, not only by reason of the waves of people who force their way into our countries or want to get in, but also of security problems.’ It should not be forgotten that we have, over recent weeks, made a number of dramatic discoveries that can certainly be counted as helping us in the fight against terrorism, although they also show how vulnerable Europe is."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
"Adieu Tristesse!"1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples