Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2009-10-21-Speech-3-254"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20091021.10.3-254"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Madam President, I would first of all agree with James Elles about a greater strategic dialogue with a great strategic partner. This is the objective that we have.
On the question of barriers, we already know that you, Parliament, want to have a study, and we welcome your support for this study. It would be important in guiding future work for the TEC. The study has not yet been finalised, but is under way, and there are still a number of technical issues to be cleared up before it is totally ready for publication. Commissioner Ashton here will deal with this, and I will certainly convey Parliament’s interest.
Let me also say, because this was mentioned, that the Energy Council will not overlap with the TEC. The agendas will complement each other. It is clear that security issues will go to the Energy Council, whereas regulatory issues go to the TECH. The focus of the Energy Council is on new technologies and energy security.
A very brief word on SWIFT and some GLS questions that have been mentioned. The SWIFT agreement is needed as it sets out specific safeguards on data. That is clear and the mutual legal assistance agreement would also really like to go there.
It should also be known that this mutual legal assistance agreement is at the heart of the SWIFT agreement, and any US request is subject to the authorisation of an EU judicial authority within that framework, so we have to keep working on it.
On the ESTA, we issued a preliminary assessment which concluded that, based on the interim final rule, ESTA is not tantamount to the Schengen visa application process as defined in the European Commission’s common consular instructions. We will, however, prepare a final assessment once the final rule on ESTA has been published, and this evaluation will also address the question of the ESTA fee if the fee is really put into place. You can imagine that we do not want it.
A last answer on terrorism. In our work on the summit, we are discussing with the US how to move towards closer cooperation in the fight against terrorism, especially in the light of the plans to close Guantánamo.
The need to ensure respect for fundamental rights is essential. The conclusion of the mutual legal assistance treaties will also help us in this respect. We will therefore also cooperate on how to prevent radicalism, including misuse of the Internet.
You can see that there is an enormous range of issues. We have spoken about all the political issues before, but I agree with the Council President that although this will be an important summit, it will only be one meeting of a few hours. Not everything will be solved in one meeting, but it will be a very good restart or re-beginning.
As I said before, it is about cooperating for global recovery, so financial and economic questions will be very high on our agenda. We have been one of the driving forces behind the activation of the G20 Summit process which was raised, as you know, to leaders’ level last November on the initiative of President Barroso and President Sarkozy, but we are not the only ones that are needed.
The Pittsburgh G20 Summit has also been a success in providing a platform for flexible macroeconomic coordination as we also seek exit strategies to gradually pare back our respective policies of immediate crisis response.
The IMF and the World Bank agree that this will require different approaches from each party depending on the respective economic situation. Given the current global economic situation, the leaders will naturally also discuss possible ways out of the crisis, of boosting growth and creating jobs, and the question of the regulation of financial markets will be particularly important.
We think it is necessary to ensure the rapid establishment of a globally coordinated system of ‘macro-prudential’ supervision based upon close cooperation with the International Monetary Fund and the Financial Stability Board.
On banking, we need to deploy the London and Pittsburgh commitments for better and more capital and stricter prudential rules consistently among financial centres. We need to intensify our work towards effective global convergence policies on crisis management and systemically important financial institutions.
We should also achieve a single set of high-quality global accounting standards on financial instruments by the end of 2010 and, hopefully, complete convergence by June 2011.
On climate change, we had a very first exchange on climate change with President Obama in Prague. I was personally present and we pressured the United States to do more on climate change, but we also know that President Obama has a very important health care issue in Congress and the Senate. I therefore think that we will have to put even more pressure on him to redouble the efforts to find committed, binding regulations for Copenhagen, in the light of his preoccupation with the domestic agenda.
With regard to the TEC, this is a very important new mechanism, or re-energised mechanism, to work on all matters regarding the free market and market barriers. We want to eliminate these, which is the ultimate objective of the TEC. This was clearly stated in the TEC framework agreement of 30 April 2007. Of course, I am aware of the different ideas that have been raised recently – such as reaching a unified transatlantic market by 2015 through the elimination of existing obstacles to economic integration: the so-called Millán Mon report. We no doubt need to work on the right balance between ambition and realism, which is why we are working on medium-term priority tasks for the TEC."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata | |
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples