Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2008-12-16-Speech-2-196"

PredicateValue (sorted: default)
rdf:type
dcterms:Date
dcterms:Is Part Of
dcterms:Language
lpv:document identification number
"en.20081216.31.2-196"2
lpv:hasSubsequent
lpv:speaker
lpv:spokenAs
lpv:translated text
"Mr President, Mr President-in-Office of the Council, President of the Commission, without a doubt, we shall remember this French Presidency. It will be remembered on account of the seriousness of the events that have taken place during the last six months and on account of the exceptional significance of some of the issues it has had to deal with. However, it will also be remembered, I fully acknowledge, on account of the rather unusual style of the President-in-Office of the Council, a combination of determination, resourcefulness and iconoclastic methods in relation to the Community’s established canon, all of which are the sort of things of which I would approve. Apart from the style, we will remember above all the mode of governance of the European Union that he initiated, in particular the irruption of politics into a world where it traditionally had no place, something that I have always called for. I am also convinced that the President of the European Council may not exactly appreciate, but will at least accept, with better grace than at the time of his last speech to the European Parliament, my departing from polite, conciliatory comments, this time in relation to the last European Council, in order to point out a few problems, because real politics implies a frank but respectful exchange of ideas. I must firstly mention the climate change and energy package. Obviously it would have been tragic if the European Council had been thwarted over this important issue for civilisation. I understand, therefore, that the fact that a compromise exists between the 27 has been highlighted because of its importance for the authority of the European Union and especially for the follow-up process. For all that, ought one to speak about a historic agreement and one that will make the European Union a model? I do not think so. Surely this compromise risks the result that the vast majority of European industries will be exonerated of any ecological constraints? Surely Europe risks reducing its own emissions by only a small proportion by contenting itself with making a contribution to reducing them outside of Europe by means of the compensation mechanism? Surely developing countries are rightly expressing their bitterness in the face of the lack of any binding mechanism for financial solidarity with regard to them? If this model, as it stands, became widespread, it would be impossible to achieve the essential objectives laid down by the global scientific community. It is, therefore, a good thing that a European agreement exists but, at this stage, its scope is not up to meeting expectations or needs. I advocate the same clarity when it comes to assessing the recovery plan adopted in Brussels. Noisy self-congratulation would, in my opinion, send a counter-productive message to our fellow citizens. At a time when household consumption is falling, when more and more plans for cutting jobs are being announced, and when social tensions are mounting – look at Greece – this plan raises many questions. Recovery for whom? Who is going to pay for this new plan costing billions? What results is it going to bring? Why, in the context of the same plan, does one Member State increase the purchasing power of its people while another only helps businesses? How is it that loans granted to banks are not going to companies, because they are the ones who need direct help now? Why do Member States who bail out banks not systematically take proportionate control, in order to create conditions for responsible management, geared towards creating jobs and wealth that are useful to society? There are so many common-sense questions that it would be very wise to answer before any other consideration. Finally, no one will be surprised that my group does not congratulate the European Council for putting pressure on the Irish people. You are aware that the Irish people’s expectations of change, like those of European people in general, are much deeper than those you have described. You will have another illustration of that shortly in the streets of Strasbourg. You have to listen to them and give them answers because, just as you have said, Mr President, sweeping the dust under the carpet leads to difficulties in the future."@en1
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata
lpv:videoURI

Named graphs describing this resource:

1http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/English.ttl.gz
2http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/Events_and_structure.ttl.gz
3http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/spokenAs.ttl.gz

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph