Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-04-13-Speech-3-007"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20050413.2.3-007"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, Mr President of the Commission, ladies and gentlemen, in this Chamber on 12 January I presented to you the programme of the Luxembourg Presidency for the next six months.
On this point, as on others, I wish to challenge the perception, and indeed the suspicion fed by ignorance, that the present Commission sees itself as the engine of a neo-liberal Europe. This has not been the impression I have taken from discussions with various members of the Commission, particularly on the directive concerning the internal market in services. This draft directive is the fruit of the deliberations of the previous Commission. The new Commission, together with the other European institutions, will make the amendments required by the European social model.
It was our ambition, Mr President, to clarify a misunderstanding that has taken root over the past few years, in that we wanted to demonstrate, by doing what we did, that there is a difference between the sustainable-development strategy and the Lisbon Strategy. It is wrong to present sustainable development as the third pillar of the Lisbon Strategy, because sustainable development is a cross-cutting strategy that affects all other policies and hence relates to all aspects of the Lisbon Strategy, such as the environment, fisheries, agriculture, public finance and social security. Sustainable development, in other words, is what is known in English as an ‘overarching principle’, which has to be applied in the implementation of every policy pursued by the European Union. For this reason, the Presidency will take the initiative of having the European Council adopt, at its June summit, a declaration on the guiding principles of sustainable development which is designed to serve as a basis for the renewal of the sustainable development strategy adopted by the European Council in Gothenburg in 2001.
On the basis of a decision taken by the Environment Ministers, we examined all the policies that have to be borne in mind whenever the subject of climate change is discussed. You will have noticed that the European Council welcomed the entry into force of the Kyoto Protocol and, more particularly, its ratification by the Russian Federation. It is now time to devise a medium- and long-term EU strategy to combat climate change, a strategy that must be compatible with the aim of limiting the increase in the global annual mean surface temperature to a maximum of two degrees above pre-industrial levels. In view of the emission reductions that are required on a global scale, efforts made over the coming decades will have to be underpinned by the common consent of all countries. The Union estimates that reduction profiles in the order of 15 to 30% in relation to the Kyoto reference values will be required of the developed countries by the year 2020; the long-term aim, according to the conclusions adopted by the Council of Environment Ministers, would be to achieve reductions in the order of 60 to 80% between now and 2050.
In the course of the European Council meeting in Brussels, we discussed a number of matters in the field of foreign affairs. I know you could scarcely contain your delight at what we said about reforming the United Nations. We took the occasion of the Council summit to return to the painful subject of Lebanon, a country which goes from one ordeal to another and which deserves the solidarity of Europeans. Accordingly, we called on Syria to implement rapidly its pledges to withdraw all its troops and intelligence services from Lebanon.
Mr President, I should have liked to present a more comprehensive picture, but I shall fill in the gaps at the end of the debate, if there is to be a debate.
Today, as tradition dictates, I shall briefly present to you the results of the recent meeting of the European Council. I say briefly because, given the overwhelming attendance in the House today, the debate may not be greatly enriched. For this reason I do not seek to stoke the debate but simply to inform you that we agreed on the reform of the Stability and Growth Pact after some bitter debating, after macho and virile exchanges, although the occasional female voice did make itself heard in the midst of the stormy debate. The result at which we arrived represents a balanced outcome, because it attaches all due importance to stability and because it does everything possible to ensure that the application of the stability rules will not restrict the growth potential that exists and should exist in Europe. To this end, we did not interfere with the underlying principles of the Pact, but we did flesh out the framework, which means that the Stability and Growth Pact will henceforth apply in different ways in each phase of the trade cycle.
The reform that we finally enacted is the fruit of excellent cooperation, and I must emphasise this here, between the Commission and the Council or, to be more precise, between the College of Commissioners and the Presidency of the Council, between the Commissioner responsible for monetary affairs and the President of the Council of Finance Ministers. It gave me real pleasure to be able to work hand in hand with the Commission.
Everything has been said about the reform of the Pact, and much of what has been said borders on fabrication. Those who say that any deficit will be permissible once the Pact has been reformed and those who present the reform measures as a green light for Europe to follow the primrose path leading to mountains of debt are sorely mistaken. Neither the basic rules enshrined in the EC Treaty nor those set out in the Pact have been changed. The 3% and 60% criteria remain the cornerstones of a system which will continue to be based on clear rules and logical legal provisions.
I wish to reiterate here that, as soon as we identify a transgression of the 3% barrier, the Commission will compile a report, and the Member State in question will be placed under closer surveillance. I want to make it clear that – as has always been the case – a deficit in excess of the reference value, namely 3%, does not automatically trigger infringement proceedings. Some people are behaving as if this were an innovation, thereby revealing a lack of familiarity with the terms of the Maastricht Treaty, which introduced this provision back in 1992. The powers of the Commission have not been diminished by the reform of the Pact but have actually been strengthened. Accordingly, it is no longer a matter of being seriously concerned but rather of being seriously vigilant to ensure that the new rules are applied in a logical manner, and we shall make every effort to demonstrate, in the course of the coming months and in the decisions we shall have to take, that the Pact is far from dead but that it continues to apply and be applied.
The second item on the European Council agenda in Brussels was the mid-term review of the Lisbon Strategy. You will recall that considerable disquiet was expressed in our debate of 12 January by Members who felt that the Council was unravelling the fundamental balance of the Lisbon Strategy. After the Commission had presented its communication of 2 February on the Lisbon Strategy and its communication on the social agenda, the Commission and the Council – again acting together – succeeded in maintaining the basic balance of the Lisbon Strategy. We have, of course, realigned the Lisbon Strategy by focusing it more sharply on growth and competitiveness, but this does not mean that we have abandoned its social and environmental dimensions.
As I did a few months ago, I must again observe that the people of Europe do not always appreciate the importance of the Lisbon Strategy, because we speak of competitiveness, productivity and growth, and these terms and concepts do not stir the emotions. What Europeans actually want is to have a job, to be able to start a business and have access to start-up capital, to have open markets for their goods and services and to be able to rely on efficient communication and transport systems. They would like to be able to reconcile their working and family lives and to keep pace with new technological developments and the world of the Internet. They want access to good education for their children; they want to have at their disposal high-quality public services and all the services of general interest; they want decent pensions, and they want to be able to develop in a healthy environment. All of these things are objectives of the Lisbon Strategy. In order to give credence to the idea that governments and the Commission should henceforth be more proactive and consistent in implementing decisions arising from the Lisbon Strategy, we have consolidated the action to be taken into three strands covering ten areas of activity and illustrated by a hundred individual measures.
Many players are involved in the Lisbon Strategy: the Commission, the European Parliament, the national parliaments, the national governments and the regional and local authorities. All of these institutions and authorities must be able to derive more benefit from the Lisbon Strategy. I refer especially here to the national governments; since they are accountable to their national parliaments and to European public opinion, it is they that bear the responsibility for maximising the impact of the various components of the Lisbon Strategy.
Let me say a word or two about the directive that bears the name of a former Commissioner. On 12 January, I told you that the Presidency would say yes to the opening of markets in services and no to social dumping and that it would like to see all risk of social dumping eliminated from this draft directive. The European Council endorsed this position at its March meeting by asking those involved in the legislative procedure to make the substantive amendments that were needed to ensure that the draft fully meets the requirements of the European social model."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples