Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2012-11-21-Speech-3-394-000"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20121121.25.3-394-000"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, this has been an important debate with important messages. What a perfect time to remind ourselves, our Member States, the Commission and our aspirant candidate countries, firstly, that enlargement has never been a part of the problem! It has always been a part of the solution; secondly, that the European Union has never been about building walls, but about eliminating dividing lines through its values and principles; and thirdly, that there is no more powerful instrument of transformation than enlargement. This is an absolutely unique instrument we have in our hands. We need to use it wisely throughout our neighbourhood.
That leads me to the important contributions in this debate. I see six of them. The first one is the contribution to the debate of the interaction of the integration process, going deeper and deeper and, at the same time, extending the European Union. What has made this European Union big and strong? Enlargement alone? I doubt it. Going deeper and deeper? I doubt it. It is a combination of the two. Let us not cut off one our arms now because we are facing many problems and say that the time for the enlargement will come. No! It is this interaction between enlargement and deeper integration which is actually making the European Union a stronger union.
It is in that context, whether we call it an association membership or whatever, that we should have that discussion about a multilayered European Union. Whether we call it political union or a federation of national states, it needs to be an enlargement-friendly Union. At a time when the Member States are debating the various levels of the integration, let us open at some point the issue of to what extent we allow candidate countries – maybe not those which are in the pipeline, but others, to which some of you referred – different ways of being a part of this tremendous European project.
The second message concerns credibility – credibility through the lessons learned and credibility through engagement. We are being creative and we will continue to be creative because it is through that engagement that we are fighting reform fatigue. I am not too concerned about enlargement fatigue. We need to be aware that, if we are not careful enough, enlargement fatigue could turn into reform fatigue and then I would say that we have a problem. Any problem in our neighbourhood is our problem.
A third point concerns economic governance. Let us make sure that aspirant and candidate countries are part of our efforts to address the issues of economic governance. Let us make sure that through the accession negotiations we are not addressing only the acquis of the past, but also the acquis of the future.
A fourth point concerns adequate financing. As far as I am concerned, it is not necessarily about more money. It is about those resources being spent better and this is definitely one of the issues where I need your support.
The fifth point concerns bilateral issues. Enlargement is not about importing open bilateral issues into the European Union. We need to make sure that it does not also blow up the accession negotiation. We need to be sure that the unresolved, unaddressed bilateral issues do not create mines which could blow up before our eyes in the framework of the accession process. I am very open to finding ways – including the one of arbitration, turning to The Hague and so on – to address those bilateral issues in parallel to the accession negotiation process. Let us discuss the deadline by which you would like to see all the bilateral issues solved. I would be in favour of that deadline being the signing of the accession treaty because it is that accession process which creates a strong momentum for addressing those issues.
My last point: let me finish where I started, with the Nobel Peace Prize. If I think about the Nobel Peace Prize – maybe it is my interpretation, maybe I am wrong – I think this European Union got that prize exactly for its ability to put the deepening of integration and enlargement at the service of its people. Needless to say, I see this Nobel Peace Prize as a strong signal to the European Union at this critical time; a signal not to look over our shoulders, not to look back, but to look forward."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata | |
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples