Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2012-03-14-Speech-3-066-000"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20120314.6.3-066-000"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, Mr Füle, my group has been following the developments in Iceland over the last few years and the ongoing and intensive accession negotiations with great attention and sympathy. We see Iceland primarily from the perspective of a country with a very small population which has not only succeeded in bringing about social change in recent years, but has also drawn conclusions about how to resolve the causes of the crisis and taken the necessary measures.
We believe that Iceland is very much on the right track. Therefore, my group is also asking itself whether Iceland can bring its experiences, for example, in the area of sustainable energy policy, into the accession process and ultimately into Europe. Some of the solutions it has put in place go far beyond the measures taken to overcome the crisis in the EU. That is what the accession negotiations are essentially about. This presupposes that the negotiations are not only transparent and constructive, but are also on an equal footing as far as their content is concerned and do not have a predetermined outcome.
Some of my fellow Members would like to believe that the domestic political situation in Iceland and the accession process are not efficient in political terms. However, the key political consideration is something quite different. The population of Iceland, which, by the way, is very pro-European, because many Icelanders have studied and worked in Europe, has high expectations of the negotiations. Nevertheless, the people of Iceland do not want accession at any price. In the end, they have to weigh up the results. This is a highly democratic process which we should welcome and support.
I would like to thank Mr Preda for his very balanced report, but on the basis of these considerations, my group will be abstaining from voting. Why is this? Against the background of what I have said, the report contains points that we cannot support. Two examples of these are that if we accept, as my group does, that the accession process will remain open until the final evaluation of the results of the negotiations, we cannot behave now as if the decision had already been made.
Secondly, the report calls in paragraph 5 for a reduction in the state’s influence on the banking sector. However, Iceland had particular challenges to overcome in this area, which we must not ignore. Instead, we must assess what has been done and make use of the findings."@en1
|
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples