Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-05-16-Speech-2-192"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20060516.35.2-192"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, I, too, am glad that the President of the Commission has joined us today, for his presence here underlines the importance of the debate, and the reason why it underlines the importance of the debate is that what we are debating is important. The dramatic nature of the decision that we will have to take, that the Council will have to take, and that you have yet to take, not only in terms of its internal effect, but also of its effect on the two countries we are discussing is not to be underestimated.
We in the Socialist Group in the European Parliament, the social democrats in this House, stand by the wish that we have expressed, namely that, if there are no major obstacles, then 1 January 2007 should be the accession date for Bulgaria and Romania. That was, and still remains, our position, and I note that the President was very precise in the way he expressed it in his speech, saying that the Commission was working on the basis that the two countries should be ready for accession to the EU on 1 January 2007. Now you, Mr Rehn, and you, Mr Barroso, have chosen to express yourselves in forms of words that indicate the presence of deficits – deficits that you have described superficially rather than naming them one by one. If you are now, after seven years, going to travel to Sofia and Bucharest, then I have some good advice to give you: it is that, when you get there, you should use more precise language when talking to the governments there about what you have told this House, describing exactly where the deficits are to be found, and saying precisely what you expect by way of improvements, for that is the only way in which the governments there will have a chance of doing what they have already been doing, namely working hard to ensure that all the criteria expected and demanded of them are actually met. To do so is only fair, for, as you yourself – both the President and the Commissioner – have said, these governments are doing a great deal. The process of transformation that these countries have undergone – and this is where I agree with Mr Poettering – has been going on for all of one and a half decades and has made great demands on people. Now, in the final stage, when we need to take account of the hopes of the people of Bulgaria and Romania, of their hope that they will be able to join the European Union, this is a time when great precision is of the essence.
We can accept what you – Mr Barroso and Commissioner Rehn – have said, but by saying it, you are shouldering a great responsibility, and so I want to spell out in no uncertain terms what that responsibility is. You will be telling the governments in Sofia and Bucharest which criteria have yet to be met. You will be describing what is to be demanded of them, and you have talked to us in terms of an October date. What that means, then, is that you, in October, will have to tell the Council and the European Parliament in very precise terms whether or not you think these things are as they should be, and, if they are not, then by the logic of your own argument the decision ought to be different from what you, today, expect. You are thereby taking upon yourself a great responsibility, and I want, today, to again impress upon you what that responsibility is. It is for that reason that today’s debate is a very weighty one and one to be taken seriously.
Bulgaria and Romania are indeed to become Member States of the European Union, and we social democrats would like them to accede on 1 January 2007. We are well aware of the improvements that have yet to be made. We are confident that these countries can make them, so that the deadline can be met. We take it as read that you will keep a watchful eye on them as they do so.
There is, though, one thing I would like to add: it is that this is not just about accession, any more than it is just about the treaties on the basis of which they will accede. We also need to consider why this accession is so important in the historical context. These two countries, constituting the Black Sea Region, have made enormous advances. Quite apart from the things you so rightly criticise, both Romania and Bulgaria have stabilised to an enormous degree, and this stability on the borders of the European Union is of great significance, for this region is also bordered by others that are also our neighbours and which are far from being as stable as we would wish them to be. It follows that we have a vested interest in these countries achieving stability – economic, social, political and cultural stability – as Member States of the European Union, and so, the sooner they meet the criteria, the sooner they will be ready for accession, and the better it will be for all concerned – not only for the countries in question, but also for the European Union.
The social democrats in the European Parliament have taken note of what the Commission has proposed; although we regard its approach as acceptable, we would advise you to be more precise in Bucharest and Sofia than you have been today. What we would like to see is both countries fulfilling the criteria in such a way that they will be able, on 1 January 2007, to become Members of our Union."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples