Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-09-05-Speech-3-253"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20010905.6.3-253"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Ladies and gentlemen, first of all I believe that this debate is leaning towards recognition of the need to structure the political debate on how to regulate globalisation. In this regard, I believe that the Commission has put forward several suggestions here on ‘how to structure this debate’. We acknowledge, and I want to say this quite clearly, that the European Parliament, the elected representative of European citizens have a key role to play in structuring this debate. For we need to embark on it with a degree of humility; we are all looking for answers, but nobody can say with any conviction that they have all the answers to the complex issues facing us all.
That is why I want to point out, in reply to Mr Barón Crespo, that President Prodi genuinely wanted to attend this debate today. He had intended to take part in the debate had it remained on the agenda as originally scheduled, i.e. this morning. However, Parliament changed its agenda and Mr Prodi had to return to Brussels for the summit with the People’s Republic of China, so that he was unable to be present here today. I therefore have the honour and pleasure of taking part in this debate with you.
My second point relates to the issue in question. I believe the Commission has worked well with Parliament on the substance of the Genoa decisions. I can tell you that we too believe in the global approach. In our view, some progress has been made and some positive decisions were taken at the G8 summit. Of course they do not go far enough. There is no doubt that the financing of the global health fund to combat disease is inadequate, as we agree, but at least we can say we played our part in funding it.
Along the same lines, let me tell you quite frankly that I do not understand how, in relation to the negotiations on a new World Trade Organisation, we can be reproached for favouring a purely pro-free trade vision of world trade. We work together very closely with Parliament and what we are trying to do is to establish areas of negotiation that also take direct account of issues such as the environmental balance, the social agenda and the interests of the less-developed countries. I therefore believe that the Mexico conclusions are entirely consistent with the policy advocated by the Commission for regulating globalisation.
Lastly, in reply to Mrs Frassoni, let me emphasise that you must take my words in their strictest sense. What I said, and in fact that is what Article 33 of the Treaty also provides for, is that the maintenance of law and order is primarily the responsibility of the Member States. I acknowledge, however, that the question of law and order also has a European dimension.
In 1997, the Council approved a joint action on the maintenance of law and order. It may be that few people paid attention to the contents of that decision at the time, but it exists and the conclusions of the Justice and Home Affairs Council of 13 July are based on this joint action dating from 1997. The joint action provides for cooperation between law enforcement and judicial authorities in order to safeguard public order at European-level meetings and places it within the framework of the Europol Convention. That means we have a legislative text that regulates European cooperation on the maintenance of law and order.
We also have the Schengen Agreements. In this regard, I must tell you that in the case of the Genoa meeting what we saw was joint action by what one might call the ‘two Italian governments’. The idea was first put forward by the previous government and then put into practice by the new government. So it is quite clear that the Commission’s neutrality is beyond all suspicion in the debate within Italy. The truth is that the Italian government respected its obligations under the Schengen Agreements by reintroducing border checks at the time of the G8 summit in Genoa. Obviously, when it comes to monitoring the implementation of the Schengen Agreements, both the Commission and the European Parliament have certain responsibilities. They are limited responsibilities but that, Mrs Frassoni, is another matter entirely.
(
)"@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples