Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-11-06-Speech-3-054"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2002-11-06"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Outcome of the European Council (Brussels, 24 and 25 October 2002)2
dcterms:Language	"fr"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20021106.6.3-054"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2002-11-06-Speech-3-0552
lpv:speaker	lp:Gérard Caudron2
lpv:spokenAs	member; Committee on Industry, External Trade, Research and Energy (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3,3 unknown; Socialiste Indépendant (2002-07-10--2004-07-19)3,3 substitute; Delegation to the EU-Bulgaria Joint Parliamentary Committee (2002-10-14--2004-07-19)3,3 member_of_the_bureau; EUL/NGL (2002-09-10--2004-07-19)3,3 member; Delegation to the EU-Poland Joint Parliamentary Committee (2002-02-06--2004-04-30)3,3 substitute; Committee on Foreign Affairs, Human Rights, Common Security and Defence Policy (2002-09-09--2004-07-19)3,3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, having reached this stage of the debate and taking into account what has already been said, I shall simply begin by saying that this Brussels Council was a Council that gave us no surprises, good or bad. Of course, it ratified the list of the ten new future members of the European Union, which is wonderful! Could it really have done anything else, however, without sparking a crisis, or even a disaster? At the same time, though, the Council has not really provided itself with the financial resources needed to perform this enlargement successfully. The Europe of Fifteen will therefore welcome ten new members, on the condition that they are docile and that they agree to do what the 15 Member States often do not do themselves. And I say this because it is my view, even though I remarked upon Commissioner Verheugen’s spirit of openness. What is certainly more serious is that this enlargement could have been or could be a way of enriching the Union with even greater diversity provided by these ten new countries and by taking greater account, in parallel, of the diversities of the current 15 States. We could have encouraged greater pluralism. We instead used the steamroller technique and continued to disregard genuine social needs, public services and citizenship in every meaning of the word. The only things that count, in the long run, are the market and free competition. In 2004, therefore, barring a disaster, there will be 25 EU members. But if we do not redress the balance now, we will then only have one great liberal market subject to two restrictions, namely US policy restrictions, on the one hand, and global economic and financial restrictions on the other. So, instead of a democratic Europe of the citizens, which was the dream of the founding fathers of this Europe, we shall have a sort of Meccano house that is likely to collapse as soon as it encounters the first major crisis."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph