Ootteko panneet merkille, että pääministeri Matti Vanhanen on aivan onneton tunari kansainvälisissä asioissa? Vanhanen ei ole tavannut yhtään merkittävää valtiojohtajaa tai poliitikkoa pääministerinä ollessaan. Putinkaan ei edes suostunut keskustelemaan hänen kanssaan ja tapaaminen Tonyt Blairin kanssa meni farssiksi, kun Vanhanen ei saanut ymmärrettävää englannin kielistä lausetta suustaan.
Ulkopolitiikka on presidentin keskeisiä vastuualueita. Vanhasesta ei ole presidentiksi.
VANHASELTA PUUTTUVAT KANSAINVÄLISET KONTAKTIT
17
531
Vastaukset
- mikä on hyvä
...siirtyy niin kielitaito kuin henkilösuhteetkin sukupolvien yli geeneissä. Heidän ei tarvitse aloittaa koskaan mitään tyhjästä niinkuin muiden tumpeloiden. Synnynnäisiä kielineroja ja seuramiehiä yössä ja työssä.
- Ja piste
Minäkin tuli asiasta vakuuttuneeksi viimeistään viime maanantaisen A-pisteen jälkeen. Ohjelmassahan kommentoitiin Sauli Niinistön kielitaitoa ja sosiaalista luonnetta sangen terävästi.
- vuosisadalle!
...jaaha! eipä oo tainnu se sun peräkammarin radio toimia muutamaan vuoteen:)...tietääkseni Vanhanen on kuitenkin käynyt pääministerikautensa aikana kahdenvälisiä neuvotteluja kaikkien EU-maiden johtajien kanssa!...koitahan löytää siitä radiostasi edes yksi toimiva kanava...vai suhiseeko jo niin paljon ettet erota oikein sanoja?:D
- Santeri_Alkio
Vai niinkö se Suomenmaa on kertonut?
Matti Vanhasen kielitaito on niin heikko, että hän ei pysty neuvottelemaan tai edes keskustelemaan vierailla kielillä. Vanhanen ei osaa englantia tai ruotsia muista kielistä puhumattakaan.
Pidä mielessäsi, että Vanhanen ei ole milloinkaan ollut erityisen välkky. Lukiossakin meni kaksi vuotta per luokka ja yliopistossa hän vetelehti 15 vuotta. - Saulikin voi vielä oppia!
Santeri_Alkio kirjoitti:
Vai niinkö se Suomenmaa on kertonut?
Matti Vanhasen kielitaito on niin heikko, että hän ei pysty neuvottelemaan tai edes keskustelemaan vierailla kielillä. Vanhanen ei osaa englantia tai ruotsia muista kielistä puhumattakaan.
Pidä mielessäsi, että Vanhanen ei ole milloinkaan ollut erityisen välkky. Lukiossakin meni kaksi vuotta per luokka ja yliopistossa hän vetelehti 15 vuotta.Kato hei lehtiä lukemalla ja uutisia seuraamalla voi tietääkkin jotakin! Hei tiätsä? Sulla ei siis ollut itseasiassa mitään todellista asiapohjaa tuon väitteesi tueksi!...tais vaan kilahtaa kun selvis miten hataralla pohjalla niinistön ulkopoliittiset taidot ovat, vai? :)
- Vanhasen
päiväkirjaa nettisivulla.
Mattihan on melkein päivittäin tekemisissä muiden valtioiden päättäjien kanssa.- Huvittunut.
Minusta Vanhasen vaalipäiväkirjaa ei voi pitää oikein luotettavana lähteenä herran omassa asiassa.
:))) - hölömöjö!
Huvittunut. kirjoitti:
Minusta Vanhasen vaalipäiväkirjaa ei voi pitää oikein luotettavana lähteenä herran omassa asiassa.
:)))Mitä ihmeen kirjallisia todistuksia sä oot hakemassa! HÖLMÖ...nuo tapaamiset ovat pääministerin arkipäivää!!!!
- Huvittunut.
hölömöjö! kirjoitti:
Mitä ihmeen kirjallisia todistuksia sä oot hakemassa! HÖLMÖ...nuo tapaamiset ovat pääministerin arkipäivää!!!!
Paavo Lipposella ja Sauli Niinistöllä oli ja on erinomaiset suhteet kaikkiin EU-maiden johtajiin. Lisäksi Lipponen vaali Suomelle elintärkeätä transatlanttista suhdetta ja hän mm. kävi kahdenvälisiä keskusteluja USA:n presidentin kanssa. Eipä ole Vanhasella ollut keskusteluja Bushin, Schröderin, Chiracin, Putinin tai edes Göran Perssonin kanssa.
EU-kokoustauoillakin Vanhanen viihtyy yksin kiviä potkien.
Ei siis ihme, että kesällä Ranskan presidentti Chirac sanoi Suomen muuttuneen EU:ssa näkymättömäksi Vanhasen pääministerikaudella. Luonnehtipa Chirac Vanhasta lisäksi maakuntasarjan poliitikoksi, jota eivät kansainväliset asiat edes kiinnosta.
:))) - naurattivat
Huvittunut. kirjoitti:
Paavo Lipposella ja Sauli Niinistöllä oli ja on erinomaiset suhteet kaikkiin EU-maiden johtajiin. Lisäksi Lipponen vaali Suomelle elintärkeätä transatlanttista suhdetta ja hän mm. kävi kahdenvälisiä keskusteluja USA:n presidentin kanssa. Eipä ole Vanhasella ollut keskusteluja Bushin, Schröderin, Chiracin, Putinin tai edes Göran Perssonin kanssa.
EU-kokoustauoillakin Vanhanen viihtyy yksin kiviä potkien.
Ei siis ihme, että kesällä Ranskan presidentti Chirac sanoi Suomen muuttuneen EU:ssa näkymättömäksi Vanhasen pääministerikaudella. Luonnehtipa Chirac Vanhasta lisäksi maakuntasarjan poliitikoksi, jota eivät kansainväliset asiat edes kiinnosta.
:)))Lipposen Bush-tapaaminenhan oli suorastaan tragikoominen nuoleskelutapahtuma. Persson puolestaan heitteli vähän väliä Lipposta hevosenpaskakokkareilla.
- opiskeluissa pikkuinen!
Huvittunut. kirjoitti:
Paavo Lipposella ja Sauli Niinistöllä oli ja on erinomaiset suhteet kaikkiin EU-maiden johtajiin. Lisäksi Lipponen vaali Suomelle elintärkeätä transatlanttista suhdetta ja hän mm. kävi kahdenvälisiä keskusteluja USA:n presidentin kanssa. Eipä ole Vanhasella ollut keskusteluja Bushin, Schröderin, Chiracin, Putinin tai edes Göran Perssonin kanssa.
EU-kokoustauoillakin Vanhanen viihtyy yksin kiviä potkien.
Ei siis ihme, että kesällä Ranskan presidentti Chirac sanoi Suomen muuttuneen EU:ssa näkymättömäksi Vanhasen pääministerikaudella. Luonnehtipa Chirac Vanhasta lisäksi maakuntasarjan poliitikoksi, jota eivät kansainväliset asiat edes kiinnosta.
:)))Et todellakaan seuraa maailmaasi! Uskallan sanoa tämän varmana tietona! Sinulta vain kertakaikkiaan puuttu tietopohja! Joten keskustelu minun osaltani voikin päättyä tähän! Ei tämmöinen väittely anna minulle mitään, enkä opettamaankaan viitsi alkaa!...olisi aika toivotonta:)
- viime viikolla
naurattivat kirjoitti:
Lipposen Bush-tapaaminenhan oli suorastaan tragikoominen nuoleskelutapahtuma. Persson puolestaan heitteli vähän väliä Lipposta hevosenpaskakokkareilla.
Viime viikolla Vanhanen kävi lyhytlomalla Britanniassa muka keskustelemassa pääministeri Blairin kanssa. Keskustelusta ei mitään tullut, koska Vanhasen tönkköenglanti oli niin huvittavaa:
"Senttern häs piin veri veri äktiiv äktiiv..."
Britanniasta tultuaan Vanhanen ylisti Britannian EU-budjettiehdotusta. Budjettiehdotus nostaa Suomen maksuosuuden viisinkertaiseksi, mutta tämä on Vanhasen mielestä vain hyvä asia.
Kyllä on ikävä taitavaa valtiomies Paavo Lipposta. Lipponen piti Suomen puolia EU:ssa. Vanhanen ei siihen pysty. - kielitaitoiselle!
viime viikolla kirjoitti:
Viime viikolla Vanhanen kävi lyhytlomalla Britanniassa muka keskustelemassa pääministeri Blairin kanssa. Keskustelusta ei mitään tullut, koska Vanhasen tönkköenglanti oli niin huvittavaa:
"Senttern häs piin veri veri äktiiv äktiiv..."
Britanniasta tultuaan Vanhanen ylisti Britannian EU-budjettiehdotusta. Budjettiehdotus nostaa Suomen maksuosuuden viisinkertaiseksi, mutta tämä on Vanhasen mielestä vain hyvä asia.
Kyllä on ikävä taitavaa valtiomies Paavo Lipposta. Lipponen piti Suomen puolia EU:ssa. Vanhanen ei siihen pysty.No lukaiseppas sitten tämä vanhasen Varsovassa pitämä puhe, kun sen uhoomisestasi päätellen osaat varmasti nopeasti ja sujuvasti tehdä!
Opettavaisia lukuhetkiä!
Prime Minister Matti Vanhanen, Congress of the Polish Lisbon Strategy Forum, Warsaw, 2 December 2005
Toward more Competitive and Cohesive Europe
Mr. President, Mr./Mrs. Chairman, honoured guests,
I kindly thank you for the invitation to Poland and to this seminar.
I would like to begin by saying that it is easy to see that Poland is clearly at home in the European Union. Your first year in the Union proves that you are where you belong. The Polish people seem to feel good about Europe as well. The acceptation rates of the European Union are very high. This is very important in a Union that many citizens today find too remote.
The Polish membership in the EU has also brought Poland closer to Finland than ever before. Due to our geographical position, we have many similarities in our history. We have always been close, but now our cooperation is deeper than ever.
One of the examples is the European Border Security Agency, which you have already been able to establish with a Finnish director general. It is good for you to know that Finland – after 11 years of membership – is still waiting for the Chemicals Agency to become established.
Poland and Finland have many common concerns and goals in the Union. We are indeed the Member States in the Union with the longest external borders. Both of us are located on the seashores of the Baltic Sea. The Baltic Sea is also a joint environmental challenge for us, providing a base for economical, cultural and environmental cooperation.
Many of our common goals relate to our topic of today, the Union’s growth and jobs strategy. We see that the legitimacy of the Union can only be guaranteed by a better functioning internal market. For example both of us argue strongly in favour of the liberalisation of the services market.
Furthermore, we both underline the benefits of the enlargement process and the enlarged internal market for Europe. The new Member States have brought dynamism to Europe’s economy. Your economy is growing fast. It is important that the old Member States and their citizens understand that the newcomers are not a threat to our economies and welfare, but on the contrary a great opportunity.
This needs to be reflected in several of our joint decisions to come in the EU. It is a historical task for the old Member States to support the newcomers and the creation of their market economies. There is no doubt that the old Member States and their citizens will benefit from this support as well.
* * *
Let me now turn to the topic of today: How a more competitive and cohesive Europe is to be achieved?
Today economic globalisation is driven by two underlying forces: technological change and removal of barriers for world trade. Technological change is increasing the overall productivity by decreasing the costs of moving capital, products and production factors.
This is changing the importance of geographical distance. Markets are becoming more global. Free trade and integration projects, first in Europe and then elsewhere, have aimed to remove trade barriers on a regional basis. We all hope that the next significant step can be taken in a few days time in Hong Kong.
It is no news that the rapid growth in developing countries is shifting the focus of the world economy. An increasing share of production is concentrating to Asia.
But globalisation is not a zero-sum game where an increase in welfare in one place would result in an equal decrease of welfare elsewhere. Thanks to trade, increasing specialisation potential and the exploitation of emerging markets, the world’s overall production and productivity will improve. As economic history shows us, some countries and regions will benefit more from the integration of the world economy than others.
The question is how economies can adapt to this and how well they can exploit the growing markets and the new forms of production. This is also the main question for Europe. At the same time we have to adapt to the change as well as to be ready to exploit the growing opportunities available for us in the world economy. I strongly believe that globalisation is mostly a positive challenge for Europe. An old but well-educated and competent Europe can benefit from the changing global economy.
In addition, many expensive products of the last decade, such as computers and mobile phones, are today available basically for all citizens. This is one of the positive examples of globalisation which is seldom discussed. Our standard of living is today higher due to better purchasing power. On the other hand we are able to concentrate on the knowledge and competence intensive work, where the productivity is higher.
* * *
In recent months, the debate on how to improve Europe’s competitiveness has focused on the evaluation of social models. Which model provides the best basis for boosting our competitiveness and welfare? Member States can learn from each other about their respective successes and failures. But after all, the models are always generalisations.
It is important that the debate on social models or the future of Europe does not distract us again from the essential questions. We have no time to waste. We cannot begin yet another debate as an excuse for sidestepping implementation of needed reforms. We have known that the reforms are necessary and the direction they will have to take ever since the Lisbon summit in year 2000. Within last year we have revised our strategy and set new priorities.
The priorities are now clearly set. We want better regulated effective internal market and free and fair trade. We want to improve European infrastructure, invest in R&D, education and skills and develop a strong European industrial base. And we want more and better jobs.
Now it is time to act. The Lisbon strategy is the European Union's answer to the challenges of globalisation and ageing. However, notwithstanding the Lisbon agenda, the competitiveness of the Union has not improved over the past years. This makes the full implementation of the strategy even more vital.
As the EU’s revised growth and employment strategy points out, the Member States play a key role in the reforms. The EU does not legislate as a community about reforms in the national social security systems, public sectors or labour markets.
The decision taken last spring to refocus the Lisbon strategy on growth and jobs was a right one. The first National Reform Programmes suggest that Member States have also taken their own responsibility seriously. This seems to provide new momentum for our strategy. The new degree of ownership achieved is essential.
Finland is facing the challenges largely in the same way as many other European countries. Global competition and ageing are challenging our well-fare model. Over the next 10 to 15 years, the average age of the population in Finland will rise more rapidly than in any other European country, with the possible exception of Italy. Ageing represents a major challenge to the development of working life and of the labour market as well as the social security system in general. The ageing of the population will generate increased pension, medical and care costs and consequently pressures on our public finances.
In the 1990s, the structure of Finland’s economy changed more profoundly than in any other OECD country in the same period. A lot of resources shifted from low-productivity companies to higher-productivity companies. Finnish industry rapidly became much more technology intensive, and production became highly specialised. This has helped us over past years. But we cannot stop here. We need to continue to reform our economy as well.
Our answer to globalisation and ageing can be summarised in the following topics: Investments in knowledge, openness and ability to reform.
It is necessary to continue our investments in education, knowledge and creation of high level competence. This is the only way we can increase productivity enough. Finland needs to be even more open than today. Openness means more trade and competition for our small markets, more immigrant labour, more foreign students and researchers, and hopefully also more foreign investments. Ability to reform means that we have to convince our citizens that by reforms in public services, incentives to work, invest and become entrepreneurs we can offer better social care than without reforms.
* * *
Ladies and gentlemen,
Finland will hold the EU Presidency in the second half of 2006. The Finnish EU Presidency is guided by our conviction that only by delivering results and continuing effective legislative work can the Union regain the confidence from the citizens. We want to concentrate on reforms which we believe will generate more welfare.
We believe that the European Union can best continue to support the economic development of its Member States by focusing on the internal market, the creation of real internal markets – not just 25, harmonised, but still too divided national markets. The internal market programme launched in the early 1990s has not delivered what we hoped it would. In this sense we are far from the finishing line.
The key word for the European Union is also openness. I believe that openness would generate competition and new entrepreneurship, which we are seriously lacking. Europe’s response to globalisation cannot be to turn inwards and start building walls. There are still far too many cross-border obstacles for trade in goods and services. The Member States can improve the market openness by their own initiatives.
There is no doubt that the potential for growth and jobs in Europe relies on the services sector. We need a real internal market for services for the 450 million Europeans. It is inevitable that this would lead to more efficient and thus more productive services. The governments should listen carefully to the concerns related to the services directive. Yet, I am convinced that a rapid approval of the directive, with some modifications, will be for the benefit of Europe and its citizens.
Europe needs to be ready for further global trade liberalisation. Developing the internal market is not enough. We must also take an active approach in creating fair and functional ground rules for the world economy as well. A multilateral network of international agreements is to the advantage of Europe. This is why Hong Kong is important. Globally, Europe needs to speak with one voice.
* * *
There are several ways to invest in knowledge and innovations at the European level. We should develop our innovation environment by creating more incentives for education and research, and by creating a better functioning European-wide innovation protection system. It is for example shameful how costly and time-consuming it is to obtain community wide patents in Europe. This restricts our investments in human capital and technological development that are central instruments to boost growth.
If every Member State invested annually 3 percent of their GDP in R&D, this would mean an increase of 100 billion euros into research. It is clear that Europe will look different if this takes place. Naturally, the target is that the private parties will invest two thirds of the sum.
Finland’s EU Presidency will emphasize broad-based innovation policy. Europe needs efficient innovation policy that combines knowledge, creativity and resources of universities, research institutions and the private sector. Our universities need to be open and attractive for the foreign talent as well. A major effort will be needed to create global centres of excellence. They can be small or big, but we need substantial new resources to be allocated among the best research centres and networks according to a clear strategy.
At the European level ability to reform means that we are also able to question our present working methods as well as the existing community legislation.
It is easy to support the Commission’s better regulation and simplification proposals. However, the present proposals are still very modest. We must be able to tackle the existing extensive community legislation as well. Furthermore, the EU must learn to trust that the Member States will take care of the matters of strong national and regional dimension. The EU has a population of about half a billion. The focus must be put on those functions that produce the greatest benefits for the whole of Europe.
Having said that, it is important to underline that the internal market programme should not in any way be suspended. On the contrary, EU must show that it is able not only to simplify its legislation but also to pursue reforms that will improve the functioning of the internal market. We expect the Commission to present a broad simplification programme involving all relevant sectors, but at the same time to continue determinedly with the key internal market initiatives.
Ability to reform is needed from the EU Member States as well. The efficient implementation of the Lisbon Strategy requires long-term economic policy that is geared towards sustainability. We have to consider not only structural reform needs but also the accelerating challenges to the stability of public finances. The employment rate has to improve. But at the same time, we have to remember that growth of productivity is crucial to competitiveness. The Economic and Monetary Union still occupies a central role in the Union’s growth strategy. The reformed Stability and Growth Pact offers a framework for ensuring the long-term stability of public finances and future of welfare society.
* * *
Dear friends,
Our national experience in Finland gives us good reasons to push forward the message we heard very clearly in Hampton Court in October. As the President of the Commission, Mr Barroso, said: Europe must reform and modernise its policies to preserve its values. It is up to us politicians to keep repeating the message and to convince the public of the long-term benefits of reforms. During the Finnish Presidency you will hear this message often. - äääh...
kielitaitoiselle! kirjoitti:
No lukaiseppas sitten tämä vanhasen Varsovassa pitämä puhe, kun sen uhoomisestasi päätellen osaat varmasti nopeasti ja sujuvasti tehdä!
Opettavaisia lukuhetkiä!
Prime Minister Matti Vanhanen, Congress of the Polish Lisbon Strategy Forum, Warsaw, 2 December 2005
Toward more Competitive and Cohesive Europe
Mr. President, Mr./Mrs. Chairman, honoured guests,
I kindly thank you for the invitation to Poland and to this seminar.
I would like to begin by saying that it is easy to see that Poland is clearly at home in the European Union. Your first year in the Union proves that you are where you belong. The Polish people seem to feel good about Europe as well. The acceptation rates of the European Union are very high. This is very important in a Union that many citizens today find too remote.
The Polish membership in the EU has also brought Poland closer to Finland than ever before. Due to our geographical position, we have many similarities in our history. We have always been close, but now our cooperation is deeper than ever.
One of the examples is the European Border Security Agency, which you have already been able to establish with a Finnish director general. It is good for you to know that Finland – after 11 years of membership – is still waiting for the Chemicals Agency to become established.
Poland and Finland have many common concerns and goals in the Union. We are indeed the Member States in the Union with the longest external borders. Both of us are located on the seashores of the Baltic Sea. The Baltic Sea is also a joint environmental challenge for us, providing a base for economical, cultural and environmental cooperation.
Many of our common goals relate to our topic of today, the Union’s growth and jobs strategy. We see that the legitimacy of the Union can only be guaranteed by a better functioning internal market. For example both of us argue strongly in favour of the liberalisation of the services market.
Furthermore, we both underline the benefits of the enlargement process and the enlarged internal market for Europe. The new Member States have brought dynamism to Europe’s economy. Your economy is growing fast. It is important that the old Member States and their citizens understand that the newcomers are not a threat to our economies and welfare, but on the contrary a great opportunity.
This needs to be reflected in several of our joint decisions to come in the EU. It is a historical task for the old Member States to support the newcomers and the creation of their market economies. There is no doubt that the old Member States and their citizens will benefit from this support as well.
* * *
Let me now turn to the topic of today: How a more competitive and cohesive Europe is to be achieved?
Today economic globalisation is driven by two underlying forces: technological change and removal of barriers for world trade. Technological change is increasing the overall productivity by decreasing the costs of moving capital, products and production factors.
This is changing the importance of geographical distance. Markets are becoming more global. Free trade and integration projects, first in Europe and then elsewhere, have aimed to remove trade barriers on a regional basis. We all hope that the next significant step can be taken in a few days time in Hong Kong.
It is no news that the rapid growth in developing countries is shifting the focus of the world economy. An increasing share of production is concentrating to Asia.
But globalisation is not a zero-sum game where an increase in welfare in one place would result in an equal decrease of welfare elsewhere. Thanks to trade, increasing specialisation potential and the exploitation of emerging markets, the world’s overall production and productivity will improve. As economic history shows us, some countries and regions will benefit more from the integration of the world economy than others.
The question is how economies can adapt to this and how well they can exploit the growing markets and the new forms of production. This is also the main question for Europe. At the same time we have to adapt to the change as well as to be ready to exploit the growing opportunities available for us in the world economy. I strongly believe that globalisation is mostly a positive challenge for Europe. An old but well-educated and competent Europe can benefit from the changing global economy.
In addition, many expensive products of the last decade, such as computers and mobile phones, are today available basically for all citizens. This is one of the positive examples of globalisation which is seldom discussed. Our standard of living is today higher due to better purchasing power. On the other hand we are able to concentrate on the knowledge and competence intensive work, where the productivity is higher.
* * *
In recent months, the debate on how to improve Europe’s competitiveness has focused on the evaluation of social models. Which model provides the best basis for boosting our competitiveness and welfare? Member States can learn from each other about their respective successes and failures. But after all, the models are always generalisations.
It is important that the debate on social models or the future of Europe does not distract us again from the essential questions. We have no time to waste. We cannot begin yet another debate as an excuse for sidestepping implementation of needed reforms. We have known that the reforms are necessary and the direction they will have to take ever since the Lisbon summit in year 2000. Within last year we have revised our strategy and set new priorities.
The priorities are now clearly set. We want better regulated effective internal market and free and fair trade. We want to improve European infrastructure, invest in R&D, education and skills and develop a strong European industrial base. And we want more and better jobs.
Now it is time to act. The Lisbon strategy is the European Union's answer to the challenges of globalisation and ageing. However, notwithstanding the Lisbon agenda, the competitiveness of the Union has not improved over the past years. This makes the full implementation of the strategy even more vital.
As the EU’s revised growth and employment strategy points out, the Member States play a key role in the reforms. The EU does not legislate as a community about reforms in the national social security systems, public sectors or labour markets.
The decision taken last spring to refocus the Lisbon strategy on growth and jobs was a right one. The first National Reform Programmes suggest that Member States have also taken their own responsibility seriously. This seems to provide new momentum for our strategy. The new degree of ownership achieved is essential.
Finland is facing the challenges largely in the same way as many other European countries. Global competition and ageing are challenging our well-fare model. Over the next 10 to 15 years, the average age of the population in Finland will rise more rapidly than in any other European country, with the possible exception of Italy. Ageing represents a major challenge to the development of working life and of the labour market as well as the social security system in general. The ageing of the population will generate increased pension, medical and care costs and consequently pressures on our public finances.
In the 1990s, the structure of Finland’s economy changed more profoundly than in any other OECD country in the same period. A lot of resources shifted from low-productivity companies to higher-productivity companies. Finnish industry rapidly became much more technology intensive, and production became highly specialised. This has helped us over past years. But we cannot stop here. We need to continue to reform our economy as well.
Our answer to globalisation and ageing can be summarised in the following topics: Investments in knowledge, openness and ability to reform.
It is necessary to continue our investments in education, knowledge and creation of high level competence. This is the only way we can increase productivity enough. Finland needs to be even more open than today. Openness means more trade and competition for our small markets, more immigrant labour, more foreign students and researchers, and hopefully also more foreign investments. Ability to reform means that we have to convince our citizens that by reforms in public services, incentives to work, invest and become entrepreneurs we can offer better social care than without reforms.
* * *
Ladies and gentlemen,
Finland will hold the EU Presidency in the second half of 2006. The Finnish EU Presidency is guided by our conviction that only by delivering results and continuing effective legislative work can the Union regain the confidence from the citizens. We want to concentrate on reforms which we believe will generate more welfare.
We believe that the European Union can best continue to support the economic development of its Member States by focusing on the internal market, the creation of real internal markets – not just 25, harmonised, but still too divided national markets. The internal market programme launched in the early 1990s has not delivered what we hoped it would. In this sense we are far from the finishing line.
The key word for the European Union is also openness. I believe that openness would generate competition and new entrepreneurship, which we are seriously lacking. Europe’s response to globalisation cannot be to turn inwards and start building walls. There are still far too many cross-border obstacles for trade in goods and services. The Member States can improve the market openness by their own initiatives.
There is no doubt that the potential for growth and jobs in Europe relies on the services sector. We need a real internal market for services for the 450 million Europeans. It is inevitable that this would lead to more efficient and thus more productive services. The governments should listen carefully to the concerns related to the services directive. Yet, I am convinced that a rapid approval of the directive, with some modifications, will be for the benefit of Europe and its citizens.
Europe needs to be ready for further global trade liberalisation. Developing the internal market is not enough. We must also take an active approach in creating fair and functional ground rules for the world economy as well. A multilateral network of international agreements is to the advantage of Europe. This is why Hong Kong is important. Globally, Europe needs to speak with one voice.
* * *
There are several ways to invest in knowledge and innovations at the European level. We should develop our innovation environment by creating more incentives for education and research, and by creating a better functioning European-wide innovation protection system. It is for example shameful how costly and time-consuming it is to obtain community wide patents in Europe. This restricts our investments in human capital and technological development that are central instruments to boost growth.
If every Member State invested annually 3 percent of their GDP in R&D, this would mean an increase of 100 billion euros into research. It is clear that Europe will look different if this takes place. Naturally, the target is that the private parties will invest two thirds of the sum.
Finland’s EU Presidency will emphasize broad-based innovation policy. Europe needs efficient innovation policy that combines knowledge, creativity and resources of universities, research institutions and the private sector. Our universities need to be open and attractive for the foreign talent as well. A major effort will be needed to create global centres of excellence. They can be small or big, but we need substantial new resources to be allocated among the best research centres and networks according to a clear strategy.
At the European level ability to reform means that we are also able to question our present working methods as well as the existing community legislation.
It is easy to support the Commission’s better regulation and simplification proposals. However, the present proposals are still very modest. We must be able to tackle the existing extensive community legislation as well. Furthermore, the EU must learn to trust that the Member States will take care of the matters of strong national and regional dimension. The EU has a population of about half a billion. The focus must be put on those functions that produce the greatest benefits for the whole of Europe.
Having said that, it is important to underline that the internal market programme should not in any way be suspended. On the contrary, EU must show that it is able not only to simplify its legislation but also to pursue reforms that will improve the functioning of the internal market. We expect the Commission to present a broad simplification programme involving all relevant sectors, but at the same time to continue determinedly with the key internal market initiatives.
Ability to reform is needed from the EU Member States as well. The efficient implementation of the Lisbon Strategy requires long-term economic policy that is geared towards sustainability. We have to consider not only structural reform needs but also the accelerating challenges to the stability of public finances. The employment rate has to improve. But at the same time, we have to remember that growth of productivity is crucial to competitiveness. The Economic and Monetary Union still occupies a central role in the Union’s growth strategy. The reformed Stability and Growth Pact offers a framework for ensuring the long-term stability of public finances and future of welfare society.
* * *
Dear friends,
Our national experience in Finland gives us good reasons to push forward the message we heard very clearly in Hampton Court in October. As the President of the Commission, Mr Barroso, said: Europe must reform and modernise its policies to preserve its values. It is up to us politicians to keep repeating the message and to convince the public of the long-term benefits of reforms. During the Finnish Presidency you will hear this message often.voisko joku suomentaa?
- keskustaan
Sossujohtaja Blair on mennyttä kalua. Pian David Cameron jyrää valtaan keskustalaisin painotuksin. Hän lienee enemmän Matti Vanhasen mieleinen mies kuin pälyilevä sosialisti-Blair.
- ylläpito hoi
Santeri Alkio
Tietääkös ylläpito, kuka oli Santeri Alkio?
Jos tietäisi, poistaisi tuon nimimerkin kokonaan asiattomana. - tammer
Kyllä Suomi tarvitsisi sellaisen pääministerin,joka toisi vähän jämäkämmin ja selkeämmin esiin Suomen etuja Euroopassa.
Epäilen vain,että Vanhasella ei ole erityisemmin kiinnostusta eikä taitojakaan ajamaan näitä asioita EU-tasolla.Pitäisi vain olla omissa oloissaan siellä Euroopan laidoilla kaukana pahasta maailmasta.
Ketjusta on poistettu 0 sääntöjenvastaista viestiä.
Luetuimmat keskustelut
Stefu LOISTAVAA!
Ilmeisesti joku vedonlyönti tms, selvinpäin-elämästä👍👍👍 ilmankos ei ole Sofiaa näkynyt. Miten tän parin nyt käy, kun viimi ei maksettuna enää virta1341947Msisa on eronnut
Mies ei kestänyt jatkuvia syrjähyppyjä eikä totuutta Turun yöstä.28891- 69855
Venäläisiä keksintöjä?
Kun tässä nyt yritän miettiä venäläisiä keksintöjä, niin ei äkkiseltään tule oikein yhtään mieleen. Onko niitä edes?259732Tiedän että on aika luovuttaa
En vaan osaa. Liian kauan toivonut jotain, mikä ei koskaan tule toteutumaan. Olo ei ole mitenkään hyvä, mutta itken vähemmän kuin silloin kun sinuun r64717- 10696
Katumuksesta
Pitkäperjantaina eräässä seurueessa puhuttiin katumisesta ja mitä itse kukin katuu. Yleisintä tuntui olevan pahasti sanominen jollekin läheiselle ja t132673- 26649
- 77648
Sisällissota kiihtyy Ruotsissa
KaupunkiTaistelut koraanin puolesta kiihtyneet Linköpingissä ja Malmössä. Ruotsin poliisi joutunut vetäytymään suojiin. Päätän raporttini Ruotsista.201640