Strasbourg, 06/09/2001 (Agence Europe) - Wednesday's debate at the European Parliament on lessons to be drawn from the G8 Summit in Genoa in July was characterised by sharp divisions between left and right. While confirming that the responsibility for maintaining law and order remains the exclusive responsibility of each Member State, the President of the Council of the EU, Ms Neyts, stressed that it was possible to cooperate in this domain using existing legal instruments. Basically, the Belgian Presidency believes that political dialogue with those challenging globalisation is a duty that should not be shunned - it will be publishing an open letter on the subject in the next few weeks which will be widely distributed. Ms Neyts said that she had ended her studies and started work at the end of the sixties, it was a fascinating era that she would have been sorry to have missed. She said that she was convinced that protest was a good thing in itself unlike the "pensée unique", which, she said, raised a paradox. Those who opposed globalisation were demonstrating against the very bodies which, like the WTO, were trying to resolve the problems worrying the demonstrators. The WTO did not organise anarchy, but looked for rules that were acceptable to all. The important thing was to master globalisation in order to make the most of it, and Ms Neyts said that the EU was particularly well equipped in this domain and should not be the target of protestors.
The G8 should enter into genuine dialogue with civil society and the countries which are not G8 members insisted European Commissioner Mr Vitorino, inviting the leaders who attended summits to listen to other people, particularly African representatives (Africa will be one of the subjects at the next G8 summit in Canada). The "Everything but Arms" initiative was a good example to follow to help the poorest countries. The EU can provide a concrete, democratic answer to the dangers of globalisation, said Mr Vitorino, particularly by helping reform the international institutions. This would imply changing the way the G8 operated and cutting the size of the summits (Canada has already pledged to hold a "simpler" summit, announced Mr Vitorino).
For the EPP-ED group, Antonio Tajani of Forza Italia stressed the tangible results achieved by the G8 and confirmed solidarity with regard to the Italian security forces (greater cooperation with the security forces of other countries would have been desirable, in his view). On behalf of the Socialist group, its President Enrique Baron responded that he was waiting for the results of the enquiry being carried out by the Italian parliament on the Genoa events but that did not rule out a critical attitude with regard to how the meeting was organised. Respecting law and order should go hand in hand with respecting the rights of demonstrators, insisted Mr Baron. Globalisation should not only aim at creating profit for some, but should confirm human dignity, said Giovanni Procacci for the conservative group (I Democratici), calling for a development model that was not based solely on consumerism and also for a kind of global Marshall Plan. We have left behind the "traditional" world of politics dating back to half a century ago, chipped in Paul Lannoye for the Greens. It was necessary to talk with the representatives of organised civil society. He argued that not listening to them would be a serious political error. According to Francis Wurtz, President of the United Left/Nordic Left group, Genoa raised the question of the G8's legitimacy and the issue of violence and repression, but also the question of what political response should be given to the protests without criminalising the "magnificent commitment" by the citizens who were challenging globalisation non-violently. Cristiana Muscardini (Alleanza Nazionale, Italy) defended the behaviour of the Italian government in Genoa and asked why Echelon, which "listens in on everything" was unable to warn the authorities about what was being planned for Genoa. Francesco Fiori, whose party, Forza Italia, is part of the ruling coalition in Italy, gave a more balanced response, condemning violence but also any attempt to get round representative democracy. There had been too little information and too much repression in Genoa, according to the former judge Antonio Di Pietro (I Democratici), adding that it was not the responsible individuals in the security services who were to be blamed but those who had given the orders. Mr Di Pietro argued that Genoa also showed the considerable 'lack of productivity' of this type of summit, "muscles and power" were unable to cover up for the absence of tangible decisions. Luigi Vinci, of Rifondazione Comunista, said that all the young people who were in Genoa had spoken about violence in the police stations after they had been arrested. Mariotto Segni (Patto Segni) responded that there had also been a real 'charge' against the police. He regretted that Genoa had portrayed the image of a divided, ineffectual Europe. He felt that the only possible response was a constitutional programme to allow Europe to express itself in a single voice.
If the Charter of Fundamental Rights had really taken root in "the DNA of all of us", exclaimed Monica Frassoni, an Italian women elected as an MEP for Belgium on the Green list, the violence at Genoa would not have taken place. Jas Gavronski, of Forza Italia, hoped that this type of incident would not prevent leaders from meeting up. Marco Cappato from the Bonino List said that if he had to choose between Genoa and Durban, he would choose Genoa. He called for future summits to be made public. The Austrian Green Johannes Voggenhuber wondered with some bitterness what would have been done if similar such incidents had occurred in Austria. Why had hundreds of thousands of people been prepared to sacrifice their own time and money to travel to Seattle, Gothenburg or Genoa, asked the British Green MEP, Caroline Lucas, while the Spanish Socialist Anna Terron stressed that anti-globalisation violence was not a "natural catastrophe" against which a civil protection plan could be deployed, but a political problem to which a solution had to be found. It's a problem that concerns the whole of Europe said French MEP Béatrice Patrie (Citizens' Movement, member of the Socialist group) and therefore of the European institutions. This was the general sentiment expressed by most MEPs.
The spectacle of a summit taking place in a ghetto is brutal, but so is the violence, concluded Ms Neyts, hoping that the Belgian Presidency would manage to strike a balance between security and participation. The debate around globalisation is only beginning: if it is to bear fruit, other people had not only to be listened to, but an attempt had to be made to understand them, she said. The President confirmed that within the limit of its powers, the Council would try to quell violence. One of the lessons to be drawn was that the debate over globalisation had to be structured: the Commission has some ideas about how to do this, concluded Mr Vitorino.