Conference Report

CONTENTSFOREWORD BY THE CHAIRMAN OF STANDING COMMITTEE......................................................................3Chairman of the Standing Committee.....................................................................................................................................3OPENING CEREMONY.................................................................................................................................................4OPENING OF THE CONFERENCE........................................................................................................................................4Ms Birgitta Dahl, Speaker of the Swedish Parliament..............................................................................................4FIRST SESSION...............................................................................................................................................................7BRIDGES ACROSS THE BALTIC.........................................................................................................................................7Ms Lena Hjelm-Wallen, Deputy Prime Minister of Sweden......................................................................................7REPORT ON BEHALF OF THE PARLIAMENTARY STANDING COMMITTEE ON THE DEVELOPMENT SINCE THE 8THPARLIAMENTARY CONFERENCE....................................................................................................................................10Mr Svend Erik Hovmand, Chairman of the Standing Committee, Denmark...........................................................10CHANGES AND CHALLENGES OF REGIONAL COOPERATION IN THE BALTIC SEA REGION...............................................13Professor Edmund Wittbrodt, Minister of Education, Poland.................................................................................13NORTHERN DIMENSION.................................................................................................................................................17Mr Konstantin Kosachev, Member of the State Duma, Russia................................................................................17PLENARY DISCUSSION...................................................................................................................................................21Mr Erik Dalheim, Standing Committee of Parliamentarians of the Arctic Region, Norway.................................................21Mr Juris Sinka, Poland..........................................................................................................................................................22Mr Hinrich Kuessner, Mecklenburg-Vorpommern...............................................................................................................22Mr Kimmo Kiljunen, Finland................................................................................................................................................23Mr Franz Th(cid:246)nnes, Germany:...............................................................................................................................................24Mr Trivimi Velliste, Estonia.................................................................................................................................................25Mr Wolfgang B(cid:246)rnsen, Germany..........................................................................................................................................25SECOND SESSION........................................................................................................................................................27EUROPE AND THE BALTIC SEA REGION.........................................................................................................................27Mr Uffe Ellemann-Jensen, President of the Baltic Development Forum, Former Minister for Foreign Affairs,Denmark..................................................................................................................................................................27WORKING GROUP 1: TRANS-EUROPEAN NETWORKS....................................................................................................30Lord Clinton-Davis, Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, England:..............................................................30Riitta Korhonen, Finland:......................................................................................................................................................30Mr Boguslaw Liberadzki, Poland:.........................................................................................................................................30Dr Henning Klosterman, Mecklenburg-Vorpommern...........................................................................................................31Ms Gitte Lillelund Bech, Denmark.......................................................................................................................................31Mr Axel B(cid:252)hler, Hamburg....................................................................................................................................................31Ms Sinikka Bohlin, Chairman of the Working Group 1, Sweden.........................................................................................31Mr Juris Sinka, Rapporteur Working Group 1, Latvia..........................................................................................................32Ms Anke Hartnagel, Germany...............................................................................................................................................32Mr Trivimi Velliste, Estonia.................................................................................................................................................32Mr Axel B(cid:252)hler, Hamburg....................................................................................................................................................33Mr Juris Sinka, Rapporteur Working Group 1, Latvia..........................................................................................................33Ms Sinikka Bohlin, Chairman of the Working Group 1, Sweden.........................................................................................33Ms Anke Hartnagel, Germany...............................................................................................................................................34Lord Clinton-Davis, Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, England...............................................................34Ms Sinikka Bohlin, Chairman of the Working Group 1, Sweden.........................................................................................34Ms Riitta Korhonen, Finland.................................................................................................................................................35Mr Boguslaw Liberadzki, Poland:.........................................................................................................................................35Mr Juris Sinka, Rapporteur Working Group 1, Latvia..........................................................................................................36WORKING GROUP 2: CROSS-BORDER COOPERATION.....................................................................................................37Mr Heinz-Werner Arens, Chairman of the Working Group 2, Schleswig-Holstein..............................................................37Mr Rolf Fischer, Schleswig-Holstein....................................................................................................................................38Mr Juhan Janusson, the Union of Baltic Cities.....................................................................................................................39Ms Anke Spoorendonk, Schleswig-Holstein.........................................................................................................................39Mr Franz Th(cid:246)nnes, Germany................................................................................................................................................39Mr Hinrich Kuessner, Rapporteur Working Group 2, Mecklenburg-Vorpommern..............................................................40Mr Bertil Persson, Sweden....................................................................................................................................................401Mr Juhan Janusson, the Union of Baltic Cities,....................................................................................................................40Mr Heinz-Werner Arens, Chairman of the Working Group 2, Schleswig-Holstein..............................................................40Ms Laine Tarvis, Estonia......................................................................................................................................................41Ms Marju Lauristin, Estonia..................................................................................................................................................41Mr Vatanyar Yagya, Saint Petersburg...................................................................................................................................41Mr Heinz-Werner Arens, Chairman of Working Group 2, Schleswig-Holstein....................................................................42REPORT ON BEHALF OF THE CBSS................................................................................................................................43Dr Christoph Z(cid:246)pel, State Minister in the Foreign Ministry, Germany.................................................................................43To the second point:..............................................................................................................................................................44THIRD SESSION............................................................................................................................................................46REPORT FROM WORKING GROUP 1...............................................................................................................................46Mr Juris Sinka, rapporteur, Latvia..........................................................................................................................46PLENARY DISCUSSION:.................................................................................................................................................48Lord Clinton-Davis, Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe..............................................................................48Mr Edmund Wittbrodt, Minister of Education, Poland.........................................................................................................48Mr Wittbrodt informed the audience about the meeting between the Standing Committee and the NGO(cid:146)s, that had takenplace at the conferences(cid:146) first day. The conclusion of the meeting was to look at the possibilities to establish closercooperation with the NGO(cid:146)s in the Baltic Sea Region. Mr Wittbrodt refered to Mr Arens(cid:146) wish to make the cooperationmore official and practical because cooperation is very important.......................................................................................48Mr Axel B(cid:252)hler, Hamburg....................................................................................................................................................48Ms Bettina Machaczek, Hamburg.........................................................................................................................................48Mr Konstantin Kosachev, Russia..........................................................................................................................................49Mr Juris Sinka, Rapporteur Working Group 1, Latvia..........................................................................................................49Ms Anke Hartnagel, Germany...............................................................................................................................................49Mr Svend Erik Hovmand, Chairman of the Standing Committee, Denmark.........................................................................49Lord Clinton-Davis, Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, England...............................................................50REPORT FROM THE WORKING GROUP 2:.......................................................................................................................51Hinrich Kuessner, rapporteur, Mecklenburg-Vorpommern....................................................................................51PLENARY DISCUSSION...................................................................................................................................................53Mr Monty Sch(cid:228)del, Mecklenburg-Vorpommern...................................................................................................................53CLOSING.......................................................................................................................................................................54ANNEX 1.........................................................................................................................................................................55ADOPTION OF THE RESOLUTION....................................................................................................................................55ANNEX 2.........................................................................................................................................................................582Foreword by the chairman of Standing CommitteeThe 9th Baltic Sea Parliamentary Conference took place in Malm(cid:246) on September 4th (cid:150) 5th; hereparliamentarians from all the countries in the Baltic Sea Region including all the Nordic countriesmet. On behalf of the Standing Committee I have the honour of submitting this report on the workof the conference in Malm(cid:246).This year(cid:146)s themes of the conference were both a follow-up of last year(cid:146)s debate on social aspectsof the enlargement of the EU and an engaging negotiation on regional and sub-regional cooperationin our part of Europe, concretely symbolised through the recently opened (cid:214)resund bridge.In my opinion the conference was very successful because everybody recognised the need of closercontacts across the Baltic Sea if we shall secure peace and stability in our part of the world. In thisconnection I am glad to note a strong wish for concrete trans-border cooperation tasks such ascombating crime, common environmental efforts, gas networks and (cid:145)The Baltic Electricity Ring(cid:146).And even the wishes for cooperation on tele infrastructure, medical supply, youth exchange and theproposal to establish (cid:145)The Baltic University Ring(cid:146).In connection with this report I want to express warm thanks to the Swedish Parliament, SverigesRiksdag, and its Speaker, Ms Birgitta Dahl, and to her staff for arranging this successful 9thParliamentary Conference. The arrangement of the conference was enhanced by a splendidhospitality from both the Riksdag and the city of Malm(cid:246); this provided the frameworks for verygood political debates also within new structures and for good decisions concerning the finaldocument of the conference. As it is documented in this report.Svend Erik HovmandChairman of the Standing Committee3OPENING CEREMONYOpening of the conferenceMs Birgitta Dahl, Speaker of the Swedish ParliamentMs Dahl was happy to welcome the participants of the conference with examples, for thecooperation in the Baltic Sea Region, important meetings in mind. One of them was the historicmeeting held at Ronneby, Sweden, in September 1990. It was a summit meeting of political leadersaround the Baltic. It was the first time since the Second World War that some of the States, whichare represented here today, could sit behind their national flag at an international meeting in spite ofthe fact that they still had some distance to cover before they were fully re-established as sovereignStates and democracies after fifty years of Soviet occupation. Ms Dahl was one of the organizers ofthis meeting.She mentioned how Denmark and Sweden in general and the province of Sk(cid:229)ne in particular since amillennium have been linked together. The welcoming meeting the day before this year(cid:146)s officialBaltic Sea Parliamentary Conference in Copenhagen offered by the Danish delegation could be seenas an illustration to the great potential there is for creative and fruitful cooperation in this region. Acooperation, which has existed during the Viking age, during the Hanseatic era and during the timewhen the three Scandinavian countries were united through the Union of Kalmar, Ms Dahl said.The region has also seen fierce fighting - a fact which she thought is often overlooked whencomparing with less fortunate regions in today’s world. Ms Dahl though believe that the commonhistory, leaving wars and violence behind, instead, has become united in common efforts to bringabout peace, democracy and sustainable development could serve as an encouraging signal in atroubled world.It is indeed up to us all, as citizens and popularly elected representatives, to secure a sustainabledevelopment in our region, Ms Dahl said.Ms Dahl underlined that sustainable development is not only for developing countries. It is in thehighest degree also for us in this northern region with aspirations of creating an area of rapidgrowth, she said.She told about the situation in Sweden in the 1950s and 1960s that something had to be done aboutthe badly polluted waters in and around Stockholm caused by among other things the increased4standard of living in Sweden. The goals were identified and it was discussed how to attain them. Itwas then clear that it was necessary to involve practically all economic and social activities in theregion of the M(cid:228)lar Lake, west of the capital:- Mining and industrial production sites had to find new technical solutions in order to lower andeventually abolish emissions,- Agricultural and forestry traditions and cultivation methods had to be changed- People(cid:146)s sewage and waste-collecting systems had to be modernized.It took a long time, but today, tourists are marvelling at fishermen catching salmon just outside theHouses of Parliament and the Prime Minister(cid:146)s Office in the very centre of Stockholm, Ms Dahlsaid. In addition to this, she mentioned one of the written contributions to this conference in whichGulnara Roll has described a similar project for the Lake Peipsi Basin and concluded that it doesnot take much of imagination to see the parallel in the somewhat larger Baltic Region. That it is ourcommon responsibility, she underlined.Ms Dahl suggested the environmental problems in the Baltic Sea Region to be caused by:- Obsolete industrial production methods,- Outdated agricultural modes of cultivation,- Antiquated forestry practices,- Old-fashioned equipment and methods for burning fossil fuels,- Sewage systems without any purification or- Downright dangerous nuclear energy plants on all shores of the Baltic.The negative effects and risks are also evident in other neighbouring countries, she said.Even if it is obvious that it will cost a lot of time, effort, and money to solve the environmentalproblems identified, it is equally obvious that we can not put off our work. We have to deal with thesituation immediately and at the proper level, Ms Dahl underlined.She thought it important to concentrate on a few strategic sectors in order to be effective - and to beseen to be effective - that is to create good examples. Ms Dahl said, that the problems of thetransport sector and the agriculture should take priority and stated that if we do not succeed there,we will not succeed at all.5Ms Dahl thought it in common interest to see to it that effective regional cooperation is set up andmade use of at the same time as going forward establishing new societies which rely heavily onwell-functioning information techniques.Parliamentarians, popularly elected representatives of local, national and regional assemblies,constitute an enormous potential for fulfilling the dreams of a prosperous Baltic Region that will nothave deteriorated when it is time for the next generation to take over, Ms Dahl said.Parliaments and parliamentarians can (cid:150) supported by and in cooperation with popular movementsand other NGO(cid:146)s (cid:150) function as the absolutely crucial link between the citizens and the transnationalpolitical decisions that have to be made, she argued.If the citizens don(cid:146)t feel that they have any say (cid:150) how can politicians expect them to adhere topolitical decisions? How can they be expected to make necessary changes in their consumptionpatterns or even in their lifestyles which may be necessary to secure a sustainable development inthe Baltic Region, Ms Dahl asked rhetorically.We have so far tried various ways of organizing our political decision-making process. From localdemocracy via national parliaments and regional assemblies to global cooperation. I believe alllevels have their own justification and advantages. Different problems have to be solved at differentlevels, Ms Dahl said.She therefore thought the political discussion at this Baltic Sea Parliamentary Conference about thefuture for the Baltic Sea Region would be enormously useful.It is when we go back from Malm(cid:246) and Copenhagen taking along the ideas we have exchanged hereand transplant them in our own legislatures, that we can make the fullest use of regional politicalcooperation, Ms Dahl concluded and declared the conference open.6FIRST SESSIONBridges across the BalticMs Lena Hjelm-Wallen, Deputy Prime Minister of SwedenMs Lena Hjelm-Wallen talked about the bridges needed to be built in the Baltic Sea Region. Bothbetween people, democratic representatives and business. She mentioned the (cid:214)resund Bridge as anexample of cross-border cooperation in the Baltic Sea Region. There are obstacles to be solvedsuch, as differences in taxation, but cooperation is essential in order to achieve integration in theRegion.Ms Hjelm-WallØn talked about the Cold War era which made the Baltic Sea transform from aRegion uniting people into a frontier putting a stop to any attempt to work together. But now, afterthe historical changes, which took place in the early nineties, we have an opportunity to changefrom an area of confrontation into an area of cooperation, she said. The way of looking at securityhas changed from a focus on military means during the Cold War period into a broader securityconcept. It now has strong links to everyday life. Environmental issues, organised crime, illegalimmigration, nuclear power disasters, smuggling and other concrete issues are crucial to oursecurity, Ms Hjelm-WallØn said. She underlined that in order to prevent conflicts and build acommon security in the Baltic Sea Region we need to face the major democratical, social,economical and environmental problems.The major differences in standard of living and social conditions between people in the region are agreat challenge for the cooperation in the Baltic Sea Region. Ms Hjelm-WallØn continued,underlining the importance of a social market economy and free trade combined with an effectiveinfrastructure and clear and consistent rules for trade and investments as fundamental criterias foreconomic development in the Region. She said that the Region has every chance of becoming themost dynamic growth region in Europe with its unique potential for trade and with a well-educatedpopulation. However, developments in the Baltic Sea Region are not all plain sailing. Growth anddevelopment cannot be realised unless there are strong democratic institutions and a favourablesocial climate. Above all, effective protection for private ownership and an efficient social sectormust be in place for a modern market economy to function, Ms Hjelm-WallØn said.7Enlargement of the EU is one of the most important priorities for the Swedish EU presidency in thespring 2001. The challenge is to unite the European Continent after the fall of the Iron Curtain.The Helsinki Summit in 1999 secured that all applicant countries negotiate on a parallel course andthe pace of the negotiations and timetables for membership are determined by the preconditions ofthe individual country. For the Baltic countries the Summit was of great importance, since bothLatvia and Lithuania were seriously considered in the membership negotiations, which alreadyincluded Estonia and Poland.Membership of the EU depends on the candidate countries fullfilling tough political and economiccriterias. This is not to be moderated, but Sweden has decided to provide special support to thecandidate countries in selected areas that directly affect their chances of becoming members of theEU. This is one way of speeding up the accession process, Ms Hjelm-WallØn said.The partnership cooperation with Russia has a central position in EU international relations. Theoverall objective is to integrate Russia into European cooperation and promote continueddevelopments in Russia towards democracy, rule of law and a modern market economy. Swedenwill give priority to relations between the EU and Russia during its presidency.Ms Hjelm-WallØn continued by talking about a decentralised cooperation in the Baltic Sea Region.She underlined the importance of people(cid:146)s contacts across national boundaries and mentionedtwinning cooperation as an example of this. Three out of four Swedish municipalities are engagedin some form of twinning project with partner countries east and southeast of the Baltic Sea.Although this is a good result there is a long way to go, Ms Hjelm-WallØn said. She mentioned MsMarju Lauristins(cid:146) contribution on the asymmetry of spatial relation between Nordic and Balticcountries. The Nordic countries seem closer for the inhabitants in the Baltic countries than theBaltic countries seem for the inhabitants in the Nordic countries.Sweden has two special governmental projects to stimulate exchanges between regions in Swedenand regions in other countries around the Baltic Sea. For many regions these projects have openednew contacts.Ms Hjelm-WallØn said, that she hopes that regional and local cooperation across borders can evolvein the future and thinks that the parliamentarians in the Region have an important role to play instimulating such cooperation.8She closed her speech by talking about the great importance of the parliamentarian(cid:146)s work, becausewhen building close international cooperation on all levels it is essential that it has a politicaldimension. And for this kind of cooperation to be really strong it needs popular support and to bepart of a living democracy.The members of the national parliaments are an irreplaceable part of a democracy; Ms Hjelm-WallØn concluded and wished the participants a successful conference.9Report on behalf of the Parliamentary Standing Committee on the developmentsince the 8th Parliamentary ConferenceMr Svend Erik Hovmand, Chairman of the Standing Committee, DenmarkMr Hovmand gave his report on the activities of the Committee during the past year, accompaniedby some personal comments relating to the future of the Baltic Sea Cooperation.He introduced his speech by thanking the Parliamentary Assembly of the ̄land Islands for hostingthe very successful conference in Mariehamn in 1999, the Swedish Parliament and its Speaker, MsBirgitta Dahl, for the great efforts made in preparation of this years conference and the StandingCommittee for a very constructive work. In this connection, Mr Hovmand expressed his thanks tothe Polish member of the Standing Committee, Mr Edmund Wittbrodt for his enthusiasticparticipation in the work. As Mr Wittbrodt was just appointed Minister of Education, Mr Hovmandunderlined the great pleasure for the conference, that Mr Wittbrodt had taken time to take part inthis year(cid:146)s conference.Mr Hovmand emphasised that the Standing Committee has been working within the framework oftheir new and clear mandate received by the virtue of the rules of procedure adopted in Mariehamn.He underlined that the committee had two assignments, to prepare the next conference incollaboration with the parliament of the host country, and to monitor the implementation of theannual final resolutions.The final resolution adopted in Mariehamn has been forwarded to the governmental Baltic SeaCouncil, which has once again provided the committee with a written report on last year(cid:146)s activities.Similarly, the final resolution has been sent straight to several Baltic Sea Governments and to anumber of national parliaments to enable them to follow up on the activities through the specialistcommittees of these parliaments, Mr Hovmand said. The report received from the Baltic SeaCouncil is one of the most important tools when it comes to the Standing Committees(cid:146) actualmonitoring of follow-up activities. In addition to this he called upon all delegations to ensure thatthe final resolution is forwarded to national governments and parliaments with a view to theirfollow-up activities under government auspices in all relevant organs. Mr Hovmand said that it is ofgreat importance that the resolutions made in this forum embodies realistic and operative policieswell anchored in the domestic parliaments and political parties. Following up on the resolution is a10continuation of the dialogue which prerequisite for our work leading to actual results, Mr Hovmandargued.When Mr Hovmand represented the Baltic Sea Parliamentary Conference at the annual meeting ofthe Baltic Sea Council in Bergen, June 2000, he pointed out to the foreign ministers that we live inthe region in Europe that has the greatest potential for development. Mr Hovmand thinks thecooperation between the countries in general is moving forward too slowly, considering that therehave been ten years to build up things after the collapse of Communism. He thinks a new Marshall-spirit is needed and also new and stronger efforts in relation to commerce and infrastructure.Mr Hovmand recommended the following to the Baltic Sea Council:• To further strengthen the collaboration between the Baltic Sea Council and the Baltic SeaParliamentary Conference with a view to establishing a truly parliamentary dimension in thecooperation in the Baltic Sea area• To extend the traditional border-region cooperation, of which the cooperation between Denmarkand Germany is an example, as well as the new cooperation patterns across frontiers in theEastern part of the Baltic area• To take steps to strengthen the Northern Dimension by coordinating the initiatives of the BalticSea Council, the Arctic Council, the Barents Euro-Arctic Council, the Nordic Council ofMinisters, and the relevant EU bodies• To intensify cooperation relating to infrastructure, particularly in respect of harbours• To intensify cooperation between universities in the form of a (cid:145)Baltic Sea University Ring(cid:146). Thelatter an idea suggested by Mr Edmund Wittbrodt.Mr Hovmand underlined that most of the themes mentioned above is similar to those debated at lastyear(cid:146)s conference in Mariehamn. The Standing Committee limits itself to make political statementsof which there is a general support in the member states.Mr Hovmand interprets the willingness to pursue a dialogue and cooperation with the Baltic SeaParliamentary Conference displayed by the Norwegian presidency in the Baltic Sea Council inconnection with the Bergen-meeting, as an expression of the will to listen to a parliamentarydimension within the Baltic cooperation. Therefore he is pleased to see that the written report fromthe Baltic Sea Council again has been received and that a rapporteur at this conference representsthe Baltic Sea Council.Mr Hovmand underlined the great importance of the Baltic cooperation to solve problems, whichcannot be solved on a national level only. He said that the European Union(cid:146)s Northern Dimension11represents a coherent overall policy, which demonstrates how important cooperation is, as a tool forcreating stability and progress. And the Baltic cooperation is important as, these years, the BalticSea Region is experiencing growth rates unrivalled by any other European region. But thepoliticians should make the most of the opportunities by creating suitable framework conditions,and extend the cooperation in the fields of environment, commerce, infrastructure, energy,education and training.Mr Hovmand continued by talking about the Baltic Region as one, which has much to offer (cid:150) interms of culture, in human terms, and historically speaking. But also when looking into the future.The countries around the Baltic Sea have a valuable community on which to build. And he hopesthat we will help each other in the region. We constitute each other(cid:146)s world, and for this reason,your neighbour(cid:146)s problems are your problems, he said. The Kaliningrad Region would encounterparticular difficulties as a Russian Island between EU member states. But let us promise each other,through our cooperation and trough the intentions in the Northern Dimension, that we will not allowthat. Kaliningrad (cid:150) or any other area for that matter (cid:150) to be forgotten, Mr Hovmand said.Mr Hovmand addressed his warmest thanks to all the speakers who have agreed to contribute withreports and presentations at the conference as they guarantee a fruitful conference. He alsointroduced the new organisation of the conference with a division of the work in two groups. Thereason is a wish to enable broader opportunity for interpersonal talks and he appealed to theparticipants of the conference to participate actively in both the plenary debate and in the twogroups.As Mr Hovmand is to be replaced as President for the Standing Committee according to the usualpractice, he ended his speech by thanking the colleagues in the committee for their willingness tocooperate and for their constructive participation. Mr Hovmand also thanked the secretariats fortheir contribution.12Changes and challenges of regional cooperation in the Baltic Sea RegionProfessor Edmund Wittbrodt, Minister of Education, PolandThe occasion to talk about this subject is quite special. We are now at the stage where regionalcooperation has reached the highest level of development and produced a material and mostspectacular effect, in the form of the (cid:214)resund Bridge; linking Copenhagen and Malm(cid:246). This bridgewill lead to further integration within the (cid:214)resund Region -at local level -and between Denmark andSweden on bilateral level, and it will contribute to the development of the entire Nordic Region, MrWittbrodt said.He thought that this ten years anniversary of the Baltic Sea Parliamentary Conference, the firstmeeting of Parliamentarians in Helsinki took place ten years ago, motivates reflection anddiscussion on the main directions of cooperation development in the Baltic Region. And theMillennium year, the last year in the 20th century and the second millennium, naturally turns theattention to the future.Mr Wittbrodt expressed optimism about the future of the Baltic Sea Region and said that this pointof view is justified by the observed trends.The fall of the Berlin Wall started a process which could be called a "Baltic boom", Mr Wittbrodtsaid. The recent years mark a period of intensive contact-making at the regional level but also at thelocal level which seems to be an issue of top importance and a driving force of local cooperation.None of the other European regions can take pride from so many initiatives at the lowest level. Hementioned the Union of the Baltic Cities, the Baltic Chambers of Commerce Association, and theBaltic Sea States Sub-regional Cooperation Conference of which Mr Wittbrodt has been thePresident since May 2000, as well as a number of other regional organisations, which make up anetwork covering all the important spheres of life. In addition, he mentioned the Council of theBaltic Sea States which operates at the highest level and is a recognised participant in internationalcooperation and also many bilateral initiatives at the level of states, and cooperation between near-border areas. So many examples of contacts at various levels are evidence of the vast potential ofthis Region and the activity of the people who live here. This is a great opportunity for the future,and an opportunity that must not be wasted, Mr Wittbrodt underlined.13He mentioned the observed trade increase between countries around the Baltic Sea as an example ofthe great potential in the region, as the Baltic Sea Region shows the highest economic growth-dynamics among all the European regions. Mr Wittbrodt considers the disproportion between theeconomic potentials and living standards of the various countries in the region as the main obstacle.This is the heritage of the fifty years during which the Baltic Sea was divided between the Westernand the Eastern blocs, he explained. The economic gap must be steadily bridged by initiativesimproving the underinvested transport network, banking infrastructure, telecommunications andtourist systems in the post-communist countries. Border-crossing facilities, sea- and airports alsorequire modernisation.Mr Wittbrodt mentioned the fact that the numbers of air connections between large Baltic cities areinsufficient. But, despite the existing barriers, which limit trade and investment, Polish exchangewith Baltic countries develops in a dynamic way. Supplies from those countries to Poland represent40% of total Polish imports. Economic indicators will after clearing off the unnecessarybureaucracy provide a good business-friendly atmosphere in the sector of small and medium sizedenterprises. Elimination of the burden of the communist heritage will certainly continue tocontribute to the development of the whole region, he said.It seems extremely important to strengthen trans-border cooperation in the Baltic Sea Region, MrWittbrodt continued. This type of cooperation usually focuses on removing trade barriers at a localscale by implementing joint actions on protecting natural environment and developing tourism, andon cultural projects. A successful implementation of such cooperation results in higher economicdevelopment pace in the whole region and in reducing differences between the living standards ofthe Baltic States and the most developed European countries. Structured trans-border cooperation inWestern Europe has been going on for more than forty years now and the European Union countriesattached great importance to the development of local government. The principle of subsidiarity isone of the principal rules within the Union. Mr Wittbrodt said that Central and Eastern Europe hasonly recently harmonised its administrative structures with international cooperation requirementsat the local level.Mr Wittbrodt emphasised that in Poland they continue to struggle with organisational difficulties,troubles with the distribution of competence, financing the regions and their internationalcooperation, but underlined that despite this, looking from the Polish perspective, progress in thetrans-border cooperation has been tremendous. Excellent prospects are offered especially by the14cooperation of Euroregions. The examples of the Euroregions "Baltic," and "Pomerania", bothclosely linked with the Baltic Sea, and the examples of other Euroregions in which Polish units aretaking part, namely, "The Bug River" with Belarus and Ukraine and "Nysa River" at the Polish-Czech-German border area, prove that this is an extremely beneficial form of cooperation whichprovides priceless experience before joining the European Union, Mr Wittbrodt said.He continued saying that European Union membership for the Baltic countries should be a priorityin the regional cooperation. This is in the interest not only of Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, and Poland,which all together seek the EU membership, but also of all the remaining countries of the region,Mr Wittbrodt argued. The Baltic, becoming almost an internal sea of the European Union, brings aqualitative change for the regional cooperation.An expanded European Union means greater possibilities to finance joint projects and reinforce the"Northern Dimension", an initiative, which is important for the future of our part of Europe, MrWittbrodt said. He underlined that it is important to develop cooperation with Russia, particularlywith the Kaliningrad District. There are vast possibilities available here but they have hardly beenreached for, so far. It seems that there is no sound vision of cooperation with Kaliningrad. In fact,there are important initiatives being undertaken, but they lack a systematic character. Meanwhile,the Kaliningrad District as well as the other states must clearly define their strategies and long-termgoals of cooperation. Mr Wittbrodt was of the opinion that we are in the phase of looking for thebest possible solution. A correct policy involving Kaliningrad, St. Petersburg, Karelia, and otherRussian Regions into this cooperation are a big challenge for the Baltic Region. Neglecting it mighthave serious consequences for the whole region, and it might also halt its development, MrWittbrodt said.Mr Wittbrodt mentioned the sphere of education as one of the other issues of special importance forthe development of cooperation in the Baltic Sea Region. Shortsighted politicians fail to appreciatethis sphere often believing that current needs of material character must be met more urgently. But,as Aristotle said, and his words became well known in 18th century Poland, "such will be therepublics, as is the education of their young people." We can use this truth and say; that such will bethe Baltic Region, as is the education of its inhabitants, Mr Wittbrodt said. Education is thefoundation for solving the problems of the future. An educated man is a man who betterunderstands facts that makes him less susceptible to manipulation and demagogy, and various typesof totalitarianism, he is a man of tolerance, that is, one who values cultural diversity and respects15the rights of individuals and nations. Better education means lower unemployment because it iseasier to find a job, get retrained, or master new skills. A well-educated man is more mobile andbetter prepared for coping with the changing conditions, Mr Wittbrodt argued. Development ofeducation increases the ecological awareness and reduces crime. Cooperation in the educationsphere and increasing its scale and quality is a reaction to many problems, which also trouble ourregion. This is why all the Baltic countries and all the organisations operating here, from the local togovernment and parliamentary levels should pay close attention to this aspect of life, he concluded.The greatest challenge for the Baltic Sea Region is to use the historic opportunity and toconsistently work on establishing a region of welfare and stability that will become a bridgebetween Western and Eastern Europe. Parliamentarians must understand that the road to the goalsfor the nations leads not only through Brussels, Washington, or Moscow, depending on politicalwinds blowing from various directions, but also, or rather first of all, through our common BalticSea at which we are not contractors nor clients. Here we are at home, Mr Wittbrodt concluded.16Northern DimensionMr Konstantin Kosachev, Member of the State Duma, RussiaMr Kosachev introduced his speech by asking what the world will be like in the new century. Hepresented two options; either a joint effort to solve issues and to make true the ideals inscribed inthe UN Charter, or attempts to create security and well-being in a limited group of countries. Thechoice depends on whether we look at the short-term or at the long-term benefits, he said. For somecountries in transition, the short-term solution may seem more feasible and attractive to resolve theoutstanding problems by quickly joining some powerful alliances like NATO or EU.Mr Kosachev said that if looking at the situation from the opposite point (cid:150) from Russia - one couldsee Europe in its long-term perspective. Russia(cid:146)s foreign policy is under constant evolution. Russiaundertook major unilateral steps to reduce its forces in the Northwest, to make them strictlydefensive. Within the CFE adaptation process, Russia declared that, provided the situation issustainable, it has no plans to deploy additional ground based or airborne forces of scope inKaliningrad and Pskov regions.We hoped for reciprocal steps, but they never happened, Mr Kosachev said. The West went on toconcentrate only on such things in Russia, which continue to cause concern, like the following:• Russia declared its readiness to use nuclear weapons if threatened by an external aggression• Russia accepts the possibility of preventive use of conventional forces beyond its territory (e.g.against terrorists like Usama ben Laden in Afghanistan) in case its own security is at risk• Russia undertakes to really create a system of collective security, both military and economic, inthe CIS. Hence the quick progress in creating a union with Belarus, military cooperation inCentral Asia, and in the Transcaucasus.With the arrival of Russia(cid:146)s new President, these processes became more visible, but they hadstarted long before as a reaction to the policies pursued in the last years by the West, Kosachev said.Now Russia feels more isolated than ever. The last global decision where Russia participated wasthe unification of Germany. All global actions by superpowers since then (NATO enlargement, EUenlargement, world financial crisis management, peace enforcement operations in Iraq and Kosovo)(cid:150) were undertaken without Russia and seen by Russia(cid:146)s public opinion as contrary to its nationalinterests.17Mr Kosachev thinks that the reasons are to be found on both sides. Russia has so far failed to proveits reliability to the West as an adequate partner. Russia still has many internal problems and needsassistance being itself quite inconsistent in the economic reform and democratic exercise.But there is another side of the situation, - the role of the West. Russia is really eager to become anintegral part of the global community, striving to resolve the global problems, to provide realmultipolarity of the modern world order. Mr Kosachev thought it a problem that the West is notinterested in having Russia participating in solving the problems and underlined that until Russiabecomes really involved in what is happening, it will stay rather reserved or even resistant inrespect to these processes where Russia is not allowed to participate.Mr Kosachev said that Russia feels great concern about the US National anti-missile defenceinitiative. If the US begin to implement it, it will affect the Baltic Sea Region too, especially someof the countries in the region (modernisation of the radar station in Greenland, building of Globus-2in Vardł). To disregard Russia(cid:146)s concerns as is done now will not make the situation better, he said.It could have become better if, for example, the Baltic Sea countries had supported the recentinitiative by president Putin on the development of a common European non-strategic anti-missiledefence. The parliaments could have recommended their governments to start expert hearings or anongoing multilateral exchange of opinions on the issue (like, the so-called regional discussionroundtables under OSCE). The radar in Vardł could then be used jointly for international spaceresearch, Mr Kosachev suggested.Confidence building is becoming very important in the navy. The recent disaster with the nuclearsubmarine Kursk is another example thereof. We express our sincere gratitude to everyone, whoextended assistance to Russia, Mr Kosachev announced. The Duma is going to create its owninvestigation committee, which eventually might recommend creating international mechanisms forcrisis management of that kind. A first step may be to sign agreements on accident prevention at seabeyond the limit of territorial waters, further ahead (cid:150) a regional agreement on confidence buildingand security in the Baltic Sea Region. Another good idea is a system of international air monitoringin the Baltic on the basis of the (cid:148)Open Skies(cid:148) Treaty, Mr Kosachev said.NATO and EU enlargement are major factors that influence the situation in the Baltic Sea Region.Russia considers NATO to be a real factor in the European and global policy. But the resumption ofthe dialogue with NATO does not mean all the problems have been removed, Mr Kosachevunderlined. Russia is increasingly concerned by the new strategy of NATO, by its readiness to useforce to counteract (cid:148)new challenges and threats(cid:148) without any mandate of the UN SC. Thus, Russia18feels that enlargement of NATO by new members would only aggravate the lack of confidenceparticularly in Northern Europe, Mr Kosachev said.On the other hand, deeper European integration in combination with the EU-Russia PCA will creategood basis for a pan-European economic and legal infrastructure. He said that they in Russia hopein this respect that a conference on the Northern Dimension will actually take place during theSwedish presidency in EU.Russia(cid:146)s role has changed. Its potential benefits are enormous, and not only in the field of rawmaterials. E.g. Russian intellectual potential and its high tech resources are estimated at USD 400billion, Mr Kosachev said.Investment possibilities are constantly improving. Russia adopted the law on PSA (productionsharing agreements). A law on concessions is under drafting.Lack of financing is a major problem today. A way to resolve it could be to use TACIS, PHAREand INTERREG in combination, when big transregional projects are to be implemented, MrKosachev said. The Northern Sea Route is a good example, feasible not only for Europe and Russia,as it can be extended to reach the US harbours.Mr Kosachev mentioned the position of Russian-speaking in Latvia and Estonia, as an example of asituation where the West does not listen to the Russian view. He thinks that naturalisation is goingtoo slowly there, still there are too many differences in the rights of citizens and non-citizens, thelanguage laws are inferior to the internationally accepted standards, the adaptation programmes areactually nothing but assimilation. The situation aggravates when Riga and Tallinn try to rewrite thehistory of World War II by reinstating the rights of former Nazis and prosecuting those who foughtNazism. In this connection Russia welcomes in full the activity of the High Commissioner of theCBSS on democratic development, Kosachev said. He thought the parliamentarians should think ofthe ordinary people and how to ensure their contacts. The idea of a «Baltic Schengen» could berather useful, in view of the fact that Russia is the only State in the Region surrounded by a visawall (visas are required only for Russians to travel in the Baltic), Mr Kosachev said.Mr Kosachev concluded that the Baltic Sea cooperation tries to follow the good example of theNordic countries(cid:146) experiences of cooperation, creating new cooperation projects, like a Eurofacultyat the Kaliningrad University (launched 1.9.2000) or the Group of representatives of the Heads ofStates in the Baltic Sea Region for combating infectious diseases. For Russia TB and AIDS are themost burning issues.19We need more such examples. And we feel that the main goals of the Northern Dimension shouldbe security, stability and prosperity by means of equal and mutually beneficial internationalcooperation, Mr Kosachev said.20Plenary discussionMr Erik Dalheim, Standing Committee of Parliamentarians of the Arctic Region, NorwayAs a representative for both the Norwegian Parliament and the Parliamentarian Arctic Committee,Mr Dalheim spoke about the new political challenges in the Arctic Area. In the end of August thisyear, the 4th Parliamentarian Arctic Committee was taking place in Rovaniemi, Finland. TheConference was satisfied with the fact that the EU Action Plan for the Nordic Area is now coveringthe area from the Baltic Sea through the Barents Region to the Barents Sea. He said that a challengein this connection is the fact that the same political tasks are being discussed in several politicalinstitutions. The Nordic Dimension is even a part of the bilateral cooperation between EU and USAand EU and Canada. The most important institutions besides EU(cid:146)s own institutions, to discuss thesubject are the Barents-Euro Arctic Council, The Council of the Baltic Sea, The Arctic Council andthe Nordic Council of Ministers. We parliamentarians, Mr Dalheim continues, must call on ourgovernments to organize the work on the subject better, to avoid that the same work is being donetwice.Mr Dalheim thinks that one of the most important subjects in the Baltic Sea Area is to improve theenvironment. To secure an effective and environment friendly use of energy and to integrateKaliningrad in the economical development in the region. A closer cooperation on energy in theregion contributes to the development of a better environment. Increasing use of natural gas canreduce our dependence on coal and oil and thereby reduce the pollution.Mr Dalheim hopes that the work the Nordic Ministers of Energy started last year on looking at thepossibilities to make a trial on trade with emission-quotas on climatic gasses with the othercountries around the Baltic Sea, will be completed. If so we can call the Baltic Sea Area a pilotproject for the Kyoto agreement on climate. An accumulation of knowledge and results, which canbe in use for agreements to be implemented in EU as well as global, will take place. Everybodycan(cid:146)t wait for everybody in this conflict-ridden process, Mr Dalheim said.Mr Dalheim is very positive about the EU Action Plan for the Northern Dimension explicitlymentions Kaliningrad. It will be stabilizing for the region in general if Kaliningrad is to beimplemented in agreements concerning the regions social- and economical development. Especiallysubregional agreements have to be considered.Mr Dalheim closed his remarks with a comment on Mr Kosachevs(cid:146) contribution on the NationalMissile Defence (NMD). The Radar in Vardł, Norway has nothing to do with the American NMD-21system. The Russian government is informed about this and contact on civil servant level betweenRussia and Norway has been established.Mr Juris Sinka, PolandMr Sinka congratulated Ms Dahl and Ms Hjelm-Wallen for speaking in an engaging way, almostbeyond the call of duty and said that it is needed in the Baltic Sea cooperation.Mr Sinka expressed disappointment with Mr Kosachev(cid:146)s speech on the Northern Dimensionbecause the Northern Dimension was only mentioned in a reference to the foreign policy of Russia.The Northern Dimension is not economically involving Russia, isolated from Europe, Mr Sinkasaid. The Northern Dimension is one way the EU is beginning to look at the area. It is primarily aFinnish and Russian involvement and there is already a link between Russia and our area. Mr Sinkabelieved that Russia(cid:146)s involvement should be a gradual process. It should not rely on formal,regional, national or supernational treaties. They have been pretty useless in the past and the threeBaltic States and Poland have very painfully felt the results of such treaties, which promised peaceand friendship for ever, but they came to absolutely nothing, Mr Sinka said. He was of the opinionthat the Russian involvement should be that of a gradual economic process and also being adialogue, not so much about isolation, but about what we can do with our material and intellectualpotential. It seems like it is being wasted at the moment. Mr Sinka suggested to involve a veryimportant subject mentioned by Ms Dahl, namely the pollution trouble appearing in the Baltic area.That is where the true role of St. Petersburg, Kaliningrad and other places, even Gdansk, come intoit, Mr Sinka said. This is a common project we can address our self, he added. Mr Sinka emphasisedthat it is part of being once captive nations, wanting to assert themselves as truly independent states,which are not influenced by any neighbours, big or small and everything that is done is on a purelyvoluntary basis. Mr Sinka said that this voluntary wish to cooperate should also underline thepresent conference and all its future projects.Mr Hinrich Kuessner, Mecklenburg-VorpommernMr Kuessner expressed his gratitude on the fact that the next BSPC Conference will take place inMecklenburg-Vorpommern. He continued his contribution, speaking about the integration process.Everybody should strive for a positive way of working with the subject, he said. In the last fewyears we have come closer to this, added Mr Kuessner. He told that the Landesregierung inMecklenburg-Vorpommern must report to the parliamentarians what they do and intend to do on the22Baltic Sea subject. With this he thinks they in Mecklenburg-Vorpommern have come a stepforward. Last week they had a conference in Sverrin on the Northern Dimension subject, MrKuessner said. And added that all political parties in the Landtag agree on the importance. We donot need to have the basic discussion because, we have reached an agreement, he underlined. It isimportant in this phase to have the citizens and the city councillors involved in the process.Mr Kuessner mentioned that exchange of youth and people in general in the Baltic Region as a kindof (cid:147)trainee(cid:148), is an important step towards this, and he gave some examples on experiences with thisin Mecklenburg-Vorpommern.Mr Kuessner said that it is of great importance to spread knowledge and have the goals of theNorthern Dimension coordinated in the region.He thinks it is of great importance that the countries around the Baltic Sea agree on a politicalobject on the Northern DimensionMr Kimmo Kiljunen, FinlandMr Kiljunen spoke about security policy aspects, mentioning the Baltic Sea as now an uniting factorin the region, but in the past it was dividing the region.He mentioned Poland as an example on images changing. Only ten years ago Poland had threeneighbours, but it now has seven. Pointing out that the three neighbours from the past are notexisting anymore. That factor itself tells about immense historical changes in our part of the world,Mr Kiljunen said.As the Finnish nation have celebrated Kekkonen the week before the conference, and analysed hisperiod as president of Finland. Mr Kiljunen told that Kekkonen was the most important president ofFinland during the Cold War. According to Mr Kiljunen there are two basic lessons of Kekkonen’swork as president to be learned:1. (cid:147)It is better to have friends close and if enemy so, to be far away, than having enemies close andfriends far away(cid:148). That is an important message for the parliamentarians working here, MrKiljunen said.2. When having bad relations in one direction of the area of foreign policy, one tends to haveproblems in the other direction as well and vice versa. When one can invest in having goodrelations in one direction of the area of foreign policy that gives basis to build up good relationsin the other direction as well.23That is also, Mr Kiljunen said, the basis of international relations in this region too. It is not onlyabout bilateral, but also about multilateral forums, where one can invest on good relations and goodcooperation.Mr Kiljunen concluded by talking about the cooperation at this conference on the Baltic SeaRegion, a cooperation, which is still taking shape since it is a new process in historical terms. It isimplying inherent security policy implications, which are based on cohesive security. Earlier thesecurity policy was based too much on confrontational structures, and there you do have enemiesand are not building up sustainable basis of security. In our terms we do have enemies today in ourregion. But our enemies today are not people from other countries, from the neighbourhood. Ourenemies are the problems that have already been listed. Problems which are confronted in our area.When working together we are not only solving the problems itself, but also building on cohesivesecurity structures.Mr Franz Th(cid:246)nnes, Germany:Made a proposal on establishing a Baltic Sea Youth Foundation. Bridges are the keyword at thisconference, and the youth is the most important peer in the Baltic Bridge, Mr Th(cid:246)nnes said.The process in the Baltic Sea Region is now peaceful and the young people are the most importantgroup in this process. Therefore we have to improve the conditions for them to come together in theBaltic Sea Region, he underlined.Some years ago the Baltic Sea Youth secretariat was established in Kiev financed by Sweden,Finland and Germany. The European Union supports the organisation, but there is a lot ofbureaucracy, Mr Th(cid:246)nnes said. He suggested that a Baltic Sea Youth Foundation be founded. It willbe discussed at the Working Group - number two (cid:150) at the conference, he added. The foundationshould according to Mr Th(cid:246)nnes be able to help the youth organisations establishing contactsamong each other, and when problems with the EU payment to seminars etc. occurring, acting as a(cid:147)fire brigade front(cid:148).Mr Th(cid:246)nnes thinks that it is of great importance to teach the young people the common values inthe Baltic Sea Region in order to prevent any nationalism or racism. The young people do notautomatically learn this in school. Therefore it is of great importance that the young people of theregion get the opportunity to discuss with young people from other countries.Mr Th(cid:246)nnes concluded that The Baltic Sea Youth Foundation constitutes a new bridge peer over theBaltic Sea; and expressed his hope for support from the conference on the proposal.24Mr Trivimi Velliste, EstoniaMr Velliste talked about people-to-people contact and tourism. His point was that there is a greatpotential in tourism, and especially in youth-tourism. He mentioned the 9th CBSS ministerialsession in Bergen last June. It adopted a communiquØ, which among other things emphasised theimportance of people-to-people contact in context of subregional cooperation. In this connection heunderlined the potential of one form of people-to-people contact: tourism, and youth tourism inparticular. An issue the Baltic Assembly has tackled. It is important that young people get to knoweach other personally. In order to achieve that we must radically improve the entire concept of ourtourist industry, Mr Velliste said.He suggests that the countries get a comprehensive, well-structured national registry of tourist-attractions available at the Internet.Mr Velliste said that one of the best commodities we can offer each other is our identity: historical,geographical and cultural identity. Addressed to Kosachev he said that the large-scale grassrootscontacts would be an admirable opportunity to tell the difference between integration andassimilation in some of the countries in the Baltic Sea area.Mr Velliste closed his contribution by saying that tourism is a growing opportunity and a growingchallenge for all generations, both young and old, but especially for the young people. He called onthe participants to meet the challenge.Mr Wolfgang B(cid:246)rnsen, GermanyMr B(cid:246)rnsen started his contribution saying that this place is very symbolic. Sweden and Denmarkhave with the bridge between Malm(cid:246) and Copenhagen made a hundred year-old long dreams cometrue.Mr B(cid:246)rnsen said that he hoped that the participants would not only think pragmatic at theconference, but also bring in new visions.This region has the most contacts across borders compared with all other regions in the world.People look at this model-region; a region that is not yet builded socially, economically orecologically. Without the bridgebuilding there would be crises and conflicts in the region,underlined Mr B(cid:246)rnsen.Mr B(cid:246)rnsen was of the opinion that the Russian speaker was aggressive and provocative; and saidthat it is the parliamentarians job to listen to the arguments and discuss them. That is an example of25one of the assignments for this conference: to come clear with what is the real interests and what isour interest as representative from this region, Mr B(cid:246)rnsen underlined.He expressed his agreement on some of the other speakers(cid:146) point of view concerning building abridge to the young generation in the Baltic Sea Region. We must have this proposal as a centre forthis conference and connect this to the point that the Baltic Sea Region is a region with greatcultural affluence. Theatre, music and art (cid:150) that is also part of being human and bridgebuilding, MrB(cid:246)rnsen concluded.26SECOND SESSIONEurope and the Baltic Sea RegionMr Uffe Ellemann-Jensen, President of the Baltic Development Forum, Former Minister forForeign Affairs, DenmarkMr Ellemann-Jensen introduced his speech by talking about the development in the Baltic SeaRegion over the past decade. Political and economic reforms have been carried out and new stabledemocracies have been formed at a pace, and with quality that is very impressive. But MrEllemann-Jensen underlined the challenge the region is facing with regard to Russia. The transitionin the past decade hasn(cid:146)t been as easy for Russia, as for the other Baltic Sea countries. He thinksthat the Northern Dimension is needed to achieve political stability in Europe, as Europe can notachieve it without Russia.Mr Ellemann-Jensen also pointed out that the enlargement of the EU, which he consider veryimportant as well, should not replace the old dividing line with a new one. Russia must benefit fromthe enlargement as well, and therefore the relationship between EU and Russia must be developedfurther.The two most important tasks that lies ahead of us are the enlargement of the EU and the inclusionof Russia in European political and economic structures, Mr Ellemann-Jensen said. He continued byunderlining that if the EU does not succeed in the enlargement and in building up a closerelationship with Russia based on common interests. There is reason to worry for the future politicalstability in Europe.Mr Ellemann-Jensen expressed his worries about the development and the lack of political will toenlargement, as well as a lack of political vision for a post Cold War Europe. Not many years agothe enlargement was seen by all as a moral duty as well as a benefit for Europe as a whole. Today,the visionaries are almost absent. Therefore there is a need for political leadership in Europe. Hedescribes the current situation as a (cid:145)political vacuum(cid:146) which need something as the NorthernDimension, which he believes can be the instrument that will give the process of all-Europeanintegration a new momentum. In this connection a practical cooperation to implement the NorthernDimension is needed. The EU Feira conclusion adopted an action plan, which addresses the need to27integrate the Russian Federation into the European Union with initiatives, which obtain goals as;functional integration within interdependent policy areas such as energy, environment, trade etc. MrEllemann-Jensen was of the opinion that a successful implementation of the action plan might act asa catalyst for economic integration. In this connection he called on the parliamentarians in the BalticSea Region and reminded them that they have the responsibility for a successful implementation ofthe action plan, and that they are the instrumental body when it comes to ensure the implementationof the Northern Dimension.Mr Ellemann-Jensen said that he strongly agrees with the opinions expressed in the writtencontributions to the conference by Mr Kimmo Kiljunen, Finland. The political geographyfundamentally changed with the dissolution of the Soviet Union. But the institutionalparliamentarian structures have not fully adapted to this new environment, and as stated in thearticle by Mr Kiljunen time has passed the Nordic Council by, Mr Ellemann-Jensen said. Hecontinued saying that he welcome the initiatives of the Nordic Council, but that the Baltic SeaParliamentary Conference is a more a suitable forum to discuss the Northern Dimension. The wholeprocess would suffer from a lack of political legitimacy if Russia were not included in this processto a larger extent, and he therefore supports the recent institutional strengthening of the BSPC - onsetting up more formal structures. This is also a challenge to Russia and her democratic institutions,Mr Ellemann-Jensen emphasised.The countries in the Baltic Sea Region (cid:150) and in the rest of Europe - will gain from a closereconomic cooperation in the region, Mr Ellemann-Jensen said. Despite the strong forces ofglobalisation, geographic proximity remains to be of decisive importance to the trade patterns of acountry. He referred to a study conducted by MeritaNordbanken, which showed that if the averageRussian GDP per capita increases to the same level, as Finland(cid:146)s, the Swedish export to Russia islikely to increase tenfold. The study also concludes that if one compares the transition economies inthe Baltic Sea Region with the (cid:145)tiger economies(cid:146) in Asia, there are many striking parallels.Baltic Development Forum, which Mr Ellemann-Jensen is chairman of, has fully recognised theimportance of the Northern Dimension and their aim is to foster partnership and growth in theBaltic Sea Region. At their 2001 summit the Northern Dimension is made the overall theme.28Mr Ellemann-Jensen concluded by expressing his hope that the Baltic Sea Parliamentarians will dotheir utmost to commit their governments to give their full support to the Northern Dimensioninitiative. He repeated the two most important tasks the region is facing right now: the enlargementof the EU and to widen the relationship between Russian Federation and the European Union.29Working Group 1: Trans-European NetworksThe session was led by Ms Sinikka Bohlin, Sweden and rapporteur Mr Juris Sinka, LatviaMs Sinikka Bohlin, Chairman of Working Group 1, opened the working group session andintroduced the subject Trans-European Networks.Lord Clinton-Davis, Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, England:Lord Clinton-Davis talked about the infrastructure in Europe, and Great Britain(cid:146)s important role,especially according to shipping. Also the railways in Europe have expanded, which is of greatimportance to the development in Europe. This is important to notice and it is something he has notseen mentioned in any of the written contributions prepared for the conference, he underlined.Riitta Korhonen, Finland:IT and communication, that is knowledge control in the word(cid:146)s original sense, Ms Korhonen said.She told that in the Finnish Parliament they have committees working with questions of the future,and on knowledge. ICT gives young and elderly people a possibility for leading their life in theregion that they are born in. There are parts of the world, also in the Baltic Sea Region, were it isdifficult to communicate with others. This is one of the reasons to establish a virtual university inthe Baltic area, Ms Korhonen concluded.Mr Boguslaw Liberadzki, Poland:Mr Liberadzki said that the idea of the Trans-European Network is to make economic cooperationand economic independence possible. We must unite the two parts of Europe (cid:150) East and West (cid:150) andbuild bridges across the differences, he said. The ten transport corridors are not all-equal active, butthat is an economical question. Mr Liberadzki said that there is a need of building up an effectiveinfrastructure, and that one can expect a positive development, but east to Poland the situation is notgood. He underlined the importance of a good infrastructure to secure economic development in theBaltic Sea Region and concluded there is a need to improve the Trans-European Network.30Dr Henning Klosterman, Mecklenburg-VorpommernDr Henning Klostermann thought it absolutely essential within the shipping content (cid:150) thatsomething effective should be done to prevent the repetition of the tanker disasters at sea whichcaused an environmental havoc when occurring in coastal waters. He suggested to return to thisimportant topic at next years(cid:146) Baltic Sea Parliamentary Conference.Ms Gitte Lillelund Bech, DenmarkMs Lillelund Bech thought it a major problem how to finance the Trans-European Network. Shealso considered it a challenge to learn from each other in this area. She underlined the importantrole information-sharing plays in this connection.Mr Axel B(cid:252)hler, HamburgIn his contribution, Mr B(cid:252)hler talked about the environmental problems as important part of theinfrastructure discussion.He pointed out the negative environmental effects of the expansion of TENs. As a member of theGreen Party, he thinks, that one of the main challenges is to combine the needs for mobility with thedownside of this development. When it comes to (cid:148)hard politics(cid:148) the sustainability view usuallyloses ground and we just build the bridge, he said. And the next bridge we talk about is Femern.The results from the Baltic 21 report gives an example of the negative impacts on the environment,and on human health caused by the transport sector. Mr B(cid:252)hler concluded that the practices of theinternational financial institutions, when financing infrastructure projects do not guaranteesustainable development, but quite the opposite. The international financial institutions do notintegrate the environmental issues and the regional and local aspects in their practice, Mr B(cid:252)hlersaid.Ms Sinikka Bohlin, Chairman of the Working Group 1, SwedenEvery country has discussed if economic growth is environmental growth as well, Ms Bohlin said.She added that environmental growth is necessary along with the economic growth, because weneed money to pay for the old problems and secure that we won(cid:146)t get any new problems eg. oftraffical kind. Ms Bohlin underlined that a major enemy is the climate change of which very little isknown. It is necessary that organisations and governments find new ways for Europe, and we haveto start with the Baltic Sea, she concluded.31Mr Juris Sinka, Rapporteur Working Group 1, LatviaIn response to Mr B(cid:252)hlers contribution, Mr Sinka said that he agrees on the importance ofenvironmental aspects of the projects. He suggested that every project have to include theenvironmental protection aspect.Mr Sinka gave an example from the eastern part of Germany where efforts have been made toreinstall nature in the areas where brown coal was excavated. The craters have been covered, and ontop the topsoil has been refilled, and finally trees have been planted. This is of course veryexpensive, but it is necessary, he concluded.Ms Anke Hartnagel, GermanyMs Hartnagel talked about renewable energy, as the resolution also has a paragraph about energy.She said that the renewable energy is an important subject, which in the future should have a greatershare of the energy, in whole to replace other energy sources. She was of the opinion that it was ofgreat importance with a closer cooperation in the field of renewable energy in the Baltic Sea area.Ms Hartnagel gave an oral proposal to the resolution; that there should be implemented a paragraphabout reinforced cooperation in the field of renewable energy.Mr Trivimi Velliste, EstoniaMr Velliste talked about the importance of the Via Baltica. It is some sort of symbol for the BalticNations: Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, because the route is roughly the same as the one the humanchain used for connecting the capitals of the three Baltic States eleven years ago, he said.Unfortunately the success of Via Baltica has not been quite the same as the one-time success of theBaltic Chain. Mr Velliste emphasised that Via Baltica is an important pathway from Helsinki toBerlin. Berlin has become a very import centre of rapidity in Eastern Europe and Helsinki is, as weall know, very important for the Estonians. It is not as close as Malm(cid:246) is to Copenhagen, but it isquite close, though. We don(cid:146)t plan to build a bridge between Estonia and Finland, but there havebeen some discussions on building a tunnel, he said. So far it is a bit utopian (cid:150) it is too expensive,but it does show the direction of thinking, he added.The quality of Via Baltica is unfortunately uneven; some roads are better than others. Mr Vellisteunderlined that the border-crossing has been improved. The border-crossing between Estonia andLatvia corresponds to the norms of the European Union. The border-crossing between Latvia and32Lithuania has been improved rately, and indeed so has the border-crossing between Lithuania andPoland. A lot remains to be done to the infrastructure and we must continue looking for funds,especially in the European Union, he said. The Via Baltica means a lot, not only for the BalticStates and Poland, but also for the Eastern Europe and Europe as such. One must have in mind thatthe Via Baltica may have, and perhaps will have an extension to St. Petersburg, from Tallinn to St.Petersburg, which is very close. So it will also be a pathway from St. Petersburg to Berlin. MrVelliste concluded that this is one of the main reasons never to give up, but to improve the ViaBaltica.Mr Axel B(cid:252)hler, HamburgMr B(cid:252)hler found it an interesting point that Mr Velliste contributed. Mr B(cid:252)hler respected the hopesconnected to the Via Baltica, but underlined that the better the Via Baltica is, the more the traffic inthe region will increase and so will the level of CO2-emission. Consequently, we will be furtheraway from the goals of sustainable development when looking at aspects of climate change, MrB(cid:252)hler underlined. In the area of social development we are approaching the goals. Mr B(cid:252)hlerwasn(cid:146)t of the opinion that we have the strategies to deal with that dilemma. There are hugeinvestments in roads while on the other hand the public transport system is falling apart. Buildingroads is attractive for politicians, but building up public transport is not. Mr B(cid:252)hler underlined thata balanced policy is needed, and said that both aspects should be kept as strong aspects in theresolution.Mr Juris Sinka, Rapporteur Working Group 1, LatviaMr Sinka responded to Mr B(cid:252)hlers(cid:146) contribution, that he hopes that he doesn(cid:146)t begrudge the BalticStates and others connected to the Via Baltica, what have been enjoyed by Germany in many years.Look at the German Autobahn network. Mr Sinka was of the opinion that Mr B(cid:252)hler should haveanother thought about advising the Baltic States to resist on building Via Baltica.Ms Sinikka Bohlin, Chairman of the Working Group 1, SwedenWe all think about the climate change, a question, which is not simple, Ms Bohlin said. We neednew roads and safe roads, because roads have to be safe, but we also need public transport in thecities. The traffic in the cities is the greatest problem, Ms Bohlin emphasised. Ms Korhonen talked33about the new traffic (cid:150) the IT-traffic, but Ms Bohlin underlined that IT is not the only solution,because it is important to meet people as well.Ms Anke Hartnagel, GermanyMs Hartnagel added to the discussion on Via Baltica, that it is not correct to say; (cid:148)You can(cid:146)t dowhat we have done(cid:148). It is a difficult question. We must continue to develop cars with less or noemission. Cars with low emission or low gasoline consumption are soon ready for production, MsHartnagel said. She underlined that it is important to make great efforts in this area, also concerningaircraft transport.Lord Clinton-Davis, Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, EnglandAs a former Transport and Environment Commissioner, Lord Clinton-Davis said that it seemspreferably that the Transport Commissioner adopt the role of an Environment Commissioner, butthat it is not so.The Transport Commissioner should have regard to the environmental consequences of what he isresponsible for. But the Environment Commissioner should also pay due regard to the needs oftransport. The car industry is not going to concentrate on producing small hardly gasolineconsuming cars and with environmental concerns in mind. We have to think practical andconcentrate on the successes we have achieved, especially in the United Kingdom, Lord Clinton-Davis said, and asked rethorically why the countries in Eastern Europe, the Baltic States and Russiacan(cid:146)t do what the UK has done. Lord Clinton-Davis continued by saying that he would not focus onthe conflicts present, but rather create peace between the nations and achieve environmentally whatis possible. Not only talk about it, but also actually do something. What is being achieved today ispossible, only if the Eastern European countries pay proper regard to environmental considerationsthat they now are not prepared to do. What they do is to talk about it, but their rethoric does notmatch the environmental needs of the countries concerned. Instead they should do something, LordClinton-Davis said.Ms Sinikka Bohlin, Chairman of the Working Group 1, SwedenMs Bohlin said that she agrees with most of what Lord Clinton-Davis said. But not on the carindustry not caring about the environmental costs. Her opinion of the car industry was that she, as aconsumer, does have the power to insist on paying the environmental costs. Unfortunately big cars34are very modern. The women in the US want big cars because they want to be safe when they drivetheir children to school, she explained and added that it is the same in Stockholm. Big jeeps are verymodern in Stockholm. We have, as consumers, the power to say that we are willing to pay theenvironmental costs, Ms Bohlin concluded.Ms Riitta Korhonen, FinlandMs Korhonen said that she still speaks in favour of IT highways and IT communities, because sheconsiders it to be one of the main areas also for the future of the Baltic area. We already have thevery best technology available for industry and for cars. But most people and the industry do nothave the money to pay for it. The industry does not have the money to invest in the best possibletechnology, as we have agreed to do when we signed the Kyoto agreement for example.Ms Korhonen continued her contribution by underlining the importance of having a good economyto achieve a good environment. The industry must be based around things, which can be sold, and atthe moment IT is the most saleable.Besides building railroads or highways, we should put pressure on the IT technology, because it isthe future for us and the children but also the elderly, Ms Korhonen said.Electrical shopping over the Internet and education available to everybody in rural areas through theInternet means equality for those who live in rural areas and do not have the possibility to travelevery day or weekly to the school or to the University. Through the Internet and virtual schools,those people have the possibility to secure their education and build up their lives in the future. MsKorhonen explained that is why she wants to put pressure on IT technology, meaning that it willsupport business in the environmental area and that will also give us the means to create a goodenvironment.Mr Boguslaw Liberadzki, Poland:Mr Liberadzki made some comments on Lord Clinton-Davis(cid:146) contribution. He was of the opinionthat the discussion had been influenced by inexact knowledge on changes in Europe.Mr Liberadzki gave a personal example from 1987, where he tried to buy an American car and takeit back to Poland. This was not possible, because it was not possible to buy unleaded fuel in Polandat that time. Today only 20 percent of the total amount of cars are using leaded fuel. In the truckingindustry the amount is about 40 percent, about the same as in Germany. In the airline industry theaverage aircraft is less than 5 years old, coming from among others the Boeing factories. Mr35Liberadzki said, that he can not agree that the Eastern Europe is not doing anything. We have donea lot, paid a lot, he said.Mr Liberadzki is convinced that the Transport Commissioners, especially after 1993, have paidgreat attention to the environment and transport sector, in this particular case especially NeilKinnock. Mr Liberadzki quoted Mr Kinnock’s for saying: (cid:148)Environment means producing moretransport, polluting less(cid:148). This is a dilemma especially quoted by the representative from the GreenParty. Mr Liberadzki’s pointed out that Eastern Europe should not decrease traffic. It is not thegovernments or parliamentarians who wants the cars, it is the people.When speaking about Via Baltica as a case, we must develop it, Mr Liberadzki said. Numbers ofroad accident are the same in Poland as in Germany, but traffic is less in the former. The risk to beinjured or killed in a car accident in Poland, the Baltic States and Ukraine is 3 times bigger than inGermany. We can develop better roads, but when it comes to car emission it is important toremember that the cars used in Poland mostly are made in France, Germany and Japan. It meansthat it is in your hands how much we should pollute our joint atmosphere, Mr Liberadzki said.He concluded that it is of great importance that the Baltic countries and Europe in general, learnfrom each other and about what can be done together to achieve a joined European benefit in theenvironmental area.Mr Juris Sinka, Rapporteur Working Group 1, LatviaMr Sinka summarised what had been said during the discussion, which he thought had been veryinteresting and it had contributed with some important aspects to the discussion.36Working Group 2: Cross-border cooperationThe session was led by Mr Heinz-Werner Arens, President of the Parliament of Schleswig-Holsteinand Member of the Standing Committee and rapporteur Mr Hinrich Kuessner, Speaker, Head ofDelegation Mecklenburg Vorpommern.During the discussion attention was brought to the fact that cross-border cooperation is of varyingintensity in different parts of the Baltic Sea Region. The discussion revealed a broad spectrum ofdifferent co-operative efforts. It was also underlined that it is important that the different countries’parliamentarians meet in conferences and exchange views. Several of the discussants also broughtattention to the necessity of getting young people to meet each other. It was concluded that it is notenough with an exchange of opinions through the use of information technology; it is also necessaryto meet face-to-face.Mr Heinz-Werner Arens, Chairman of the Working Group 2, Schleswig-HolsteinMr Arens concluded in his opening speech that the task of the working group was clearly outlinedin the preliminary draft of the resolution. The conference participants call on their own parliamentsand on their own governments to promote cross-border cooperation. Mr Arens stated that it wasnecessary to specify how this cooperation can be achieved and that this was the task of the working-group.For Mr Arens, the widening of the European Union and the (cid:148)region-building(cid:148) in the Baltic SeaRegion are important themes for the Parliamentary Conference on Cooperation in the Baltic SeaRegion. Both are achieved by cross-border cooperation. By (cid:148)cross-border cooperation(cid:148) Mr Arensmeant not only direct cross-border cooperation but also regional cooperation over land- and seaborders.In the European Union, Mr Arens continued, the concept of (cid:148)cohesion(cid:148) is used in regard to cross-border cooperation. Thereby it is meant that in order to strengthen the community, one has to reduceregional imbalances. This concept is fully applicable to the Baltic Sea Region. Also in this region,independent of whether they are member-states of the EU or not, the states should remove socio-economic imbalances and make sure that no groups are excluded from further development.37Interregional cooperation, Mr Arens continued, exists in different forms; partnerships between citiesand regions are just some examples. The national governments have previously not always been toohappy to see that the regions were conducting a sort of foreign policy. However, the facts spoke forthemselves: Cross-border cooperation was building confidence; though a bottom-up-approach itwas the implementation of a piece of foreign policy.In cross-border cooperation one important aspect is the building of a common infrastructure.Common waterpurifying plants, day-care nurseries and cooperation between fire brigades are justsome examples. The municipalities and the regions therefore need a proper legal base. Without sucha legal base the cross-border cooperation can not work. Against this background the EuropeanUnion(cid:146)s Interreg-program do indeed bring a European added value. The new EU communityinitiative (cid:147)Interreg III(cid:148) concerns the time period 2000-2006 and is concentrated to three tasks: 1)Cooperation in the border regions, 2) cooperation in larger regions, for example the Baltic SeaRegion, and 3) cooperation in thematic networks (cid:150) explicitly also concerning other areas than theterritory of the European Union.Since the instruments of (cid:147)Interreg(cid:148) are instruments of the Community they have to be combinedwith for example the (cid:147)Phare(cid:148) and (cid:147)Tacis(cid:148) programs. Thus it is possible to create larger synergyeffects and to also involve the Middle- and East- European states, for example the RussianFederation. Despite a growing consideration of the fact that the (cid:147)Interreg(cid:148), (cid:147)Phare(cid:148) and (cid:147)Tacis(cid:148) cancomplement each other, even larger synergy effects can be achieved in the future.Mr Rolf Fischer, Schleswig-HolsteinMr Fischer wanted to give a background to the proposed amendment concerning the establishmentof an International Summer Academy on the subject of (cid:148)The Baltic Sea Region in New Europe(cid:148). Hereferred to the work organised by the Schleswig-Holstein Institute for Peace Research at theChristian-Albrechts-University in Kiel. The courses should be directed at young leaders in politics,economy, and society in the Baltic Sea Region.38Mr Juhan Janusson, the Union of Baltic CitiesMr Janusson wished to bring a local perspective in to the discussion. Mr Janusson concluded thatthrough the accession of Sweden and Finland, a northern dimension and the Baltic Sea werebrought in to the European union. The Baltic Sea is nowadays, with the exception of Russia, a lakewithin the European Union. Despite this, Mr Janusson argued, there are some problems. Comparedwith maritime projects, projects concerning land borders receive money more easily. Currentlysome support is given at the national level, but at the European Union level there is a shortage offinancing for different projects of cooperation at local and regional level. Thus, at a European levelmore consideration should be given to maritime cooperation and the Baltic Sea.Ms Anke Spoorendonk, Schleswig-HolsteinSince Ms Spoorendonk in the Schleswig-Holstein parliament is representing the Danish minority,Ms Spoorendonk would have preferred to speak Danish, but took a pragmatic stance and spokeGerman. Ms Spoorendonk did this since she thought that the subject was one that should be morediscussed in Schleswig-Holstein as well. Cross-border cooperation in the traditional sense, MsSpoorendonk argued, usually brings in the dimension of minorities. Ms Spoorendonk thought thatothers could learn from the example in Schleswig-Holstein. When one speaks about cross-bordercooperation one should remember the conditions for the people in the border-regions. The aim ofcross-border cooperation is to create peace and peaceful co-existence in the area. The aim is to easethe situation for the people in the area. It is not possible to speak about neither Baltic Sea policy norcross-border cooperation without also considering the dimension of politics towards the minorities.Mr Franz Th(cid:246)nnes, GermanyMr Th(cid:246)nnes wished to bring the delegates attention to the amendment concerning the creation of aBaltic Sea Youth Fund. Mr Th(cid:246)nnes argued that it is necessary to bring young people together sothat they can learn about their different cultures and their different points of view. Thus it will bepossible to achieve a peaceful and democratic future in the Baltic Sea Region. Mr Th(cid:246)nnes believedthe national funds were too small and argued that the proposed fund should be used when thenEuropean funds were not available or were not available in time. Mr Th(cid:246)nnes pointed out that in theamendment no sum of money or an organisational base is mentioned. The idea is that the Council ofthe Baltic Sea States should discuss the subject and thus find the best possible solutions on thesepractical problems. Mr Th(cid:246)nnes hoped that the participants of the conference would discuss the39topic with their colleagues in their parliaments and with their own governments and thus make thetopic a subject for the Council of the Baltic Sea States.As a second topic, Mr Th(cid:246)nnes wished to bring the attention to the issue of information-technologyand the necessity to establish high-speed data-highways for the benefit of all citizens in the entireregion of the Baltic Sea. Mr Th(cid:246)nnes concluded that the creation of such data-highways would notmake conferences such as the Baltic Sea Parliamentary Conference unnecessary. It would still benecessary to meat each other face to face.Mr Hinrich Kuessner, Rapporteur Working Group 2, Mecklenburg-VorpommernMr Kuessner stressed the importance of safety of ships and the safety of sea routes. It is, MrKuessner argued, an important theme since it has impact on both tourism and environment. MrKuessner recommended the parliamentarians support the submitted amendment concerning safetyof ships as well as push their respective governments to act according to these guidelines.Mr Bertil Persson, SwedenMr Persson argued that in order to promote development in a region two things are important. First,there is a need for excellent universities and cooperation among them. Secondly, there is a need ofinfrastructure. By (cid:147)infra-structure(cid:148), Mr Persson aimed at the possibility for people to meet face toface. Mr Persson also argued that it is of particular interest to bring university students together.They should be able to learn about different ways to teach and different ways to do research. It isvery valuable for the students to spend six months in another country.Mr Juhan Janusson, the Union of Baltic Cities,Mr Janusson brought the attention to the problems in the Southeast of the Baltic Sea Region. In thisarea it is not possible to get (cid:147)Interreg-financing(cid:148). Mr Janusson also discussed the problems oftravelling over the Baltic Sea and that some of the European Union(cid:146)s funds should be used in thisarea.Mr Heinz-Werner Arens, Chairman of the Working Group 2, Schleswig-HolsteinMr Arens argued that the problem raised by Mr Janusson has been given attention and that politicalprocesses have started. Thus, there are reasons to be optimistic.40Ms Laine Tarvis, EstoniaMs Tarvis wanted to give her support to what Mr Franz Th(cid:246)nnes earlier said about the youth fund.Another topic that should be discussed, Ms Tarvis continued, is the question of tourism. In order toadvance in this area, one has to deal with the lack of money, the problems of understanding eachother(cid:146)s languages and the lack of a central co-ordinator in the Nordic and Baltic Region. On the 17thof September, there will be a child forum in Estonia with representatives from Lithuania and Latviaattending. Ms Tarvis wanted to bring the attention to the fact that every year 1,5 million Finns arevisiting Estonia but only 43 000 Germans. Sea-tourism, Ms Tarvis continued, is a topic that oughtto be discussed more.Ms Marju Lauristin, EstoniaMs Lauristin reminded the participants of the working-group that the longest border between Baltic-Nordic countries and non-Schengen countries is the border with Russia. There are many problems,Ms Lauristin argued, connected with cross-border cooperation over the Russian border and they willneed much good-will from the Russian side, and some solutions and discussions on the other side.Some of the Schengen-regulations are difficult to adjust to the idea of cross-border cooperation.Some of the Russian fears voiced this morning are created from the experience of the Schengen-regulations.Ms Lauristin also brought attention to one very specific problem regarding the cross-bordercooperation. Ms Lauristin argued that the connections along the rivers of Estonia and Russia oughtto be re-established through the opening of border-control stations. The local governments are veryinterested in doing this and, for example, promote tourism and exchange of students in this way.The local governments are communicating and want to co-operate. But at the national level thereare legal obstacles that ought to be removed. The regions should be given more rights to regulatethese issues.Mr Vatanyar Yagya, Saint PetersburgMr Yagya liked to refer to the good example of cooperation between St. Petersburg and Finland.The issue that Ms Lauristin brought up has been dealt with at the national level and Mr Yagyathought it should remain at that level.41Mr Heinz-Werner Arens, Chairman of Working Group 2, Schleswig-HolsteinMr Arens finished the working group by concluding that it is of great importance to meet each otherand confront different topics. Mr Arens continued that a working process now has started. Someresults need to be achieved, but not everything can be done at the same time.42Report on behalf of the CBSSDr Christoph Z(cid:246)pel, State Minister in the Foreign Ministry, GermanyThe Baltic Sea Parliamentary Conference(cid:146)s activities secure that democratic parliamentarycondition principles are taking into account in the regional cooperation in the Baltic Sea. That is thereason for Germany to support the status of the BSPC as a (cid:148)special participant(cid:148) in the Baltic SeaCouncil. Dr Z(cid:246)pel therefore requested that the BSPC makes intensive use of this participationpossibility at the decision-making processes in the Baltic Sea Region.Dr Z(cid:246)pel presented the programme for the German presidency, which have five priorities:1. Economic cooperation2. Strengthening the Baltic Sea Region as a knowledge-based society3. The Baltic Sea Councils relation to the EU, participation in the action plan for the EU(cid:146)sNorthern Dimension4. Sustainable development and ecological risks5. Strengthening the civil society on a cultural basisTo the first point:Dr Z(cid:246)pel said that the economic development of the Baltic Sea Region during the last years hasbeen an advantage for the neighbouring countries. The trade relations that the States of the Regionhoped for after 1990 actually took place. Today the Baltic Sea is again a connecting element foreconomic contacts, trade and investments. However, this positive development cannot deceive thefact, that in order to optimize the economic development there are still problems to be solved, DrZ(cid:246)pel underlined. There is still an existing difference between the traditionally wealthy andeconomically dynamic neighbours of the Baltic Sea in the North as well in the West, while theSouth and East Coast of the Baltic Sea in the last years have gone through a painful economictransformation process.Dr Z(cid:246)pel stated that the explained goal for the Baltic Sea Council, which remains under the GermanPresidency, is to diminish the economic downward gradient. In addition, the states of the Baltic SeaCouncil last year prepared appropriate plans, and an action plan at a meeting for Ministers of Tradein Bergen in February this year. The plans are outlining the necessary action for the next years, to43secure a dynamic economy: Promotion of small and medium-sized enterprise among other things. Aconference on economy in the spring 2001, is one of the priorities of the German Presidency.To the second point:Dr Z(cid:246)pel said that the challenge for the Baltic Sea cooperation now, is to use and extend its specificpotentials. Furthermore a strengthening of the Region after a decade of the construction of closecooperative relationships and the manufacture of political stability in the Region, is needed. One ofthe special strengths of the Region lies in the knowledge capital. There is a broad potential in someof the countries in the Region of qualified and highly motivated experts in the different disciplines.The science parks and universities etc. in the (cid:214)resund Region is just one example of the potential inthe Region. All this justifies to promote the Region with substantial expectations as a knowledge-based society. That is a further emphasis of the German Presidency. In addition a new ad hocworking group is to work on questions concerning the information technology, added Dr Z(cid:246)pel.With the Euro faculty the Baltic Sea Council has created its own project for the promotion of thescientific education in the Baltic Sea Region, Dr Z(cid:246)pel said. The Euro faculty carries out for theuniversities of Tartu, Riga and Vilnius important support, in the modernisation of their curricula and(cid:150)methods.To the third point:The Baltic Sea Council has always welcomed the growing importance of the European Union in theBaltic Sea Region. It went hand in hand with the positive political and economic development ofthe Region, Dr Z(cid:246)pel said. This concerns the EU extension of Finland and Sweden in 1995, as wellas the inclusion of Poland and the Baltic States as accession candidates. Federal Minister Fischerhopes that the accession of the first group of candidates is carried out by 1.1.2005.Russia is included by the partnership and cooperation agreement of 1998. The increasingimportance of the EU in the Baltic Sea Region comes to meet the goals of the Baltic Sea Council onpolitical stability and economic dynamics for the entire Baltic Sea Region. Dr Z(cid:246)pel underlined thatthe EU extension must be conveyed and understood as a process, which is to include all the states inthe Baltic Sea Region.In addition to the EU(cid:146)s Northern Dimension, Dr Z(cid:246)pel thought it of great importance, that the BalticSea Council and other fora of regional cooperation use their expert(cid:146)s assessments, in order to makeconcrete proposals for projects of regional importance within the Northern Dimension.44To the fourth point:Renewable energy, as wind energy was invented in the Baltic Sea Region, and in the meantime ithas become of economic substantial importance, Dr Z(cid:246)pel said. Among the Baltic Sea neighboursone can find leading export nations in the area of environmental technology. Moreover the BalticSea Region has enormous natural resources.But there are still environmental risks, as a consequence of economic and military activities, DrZ(cid:246)pel underlined. The tragedy in the Barents Sea, which was a tragedy for the Russian navalsoldiers, their families and their country, suddenly showed that. It must work as an example on whyto decrease environmental risks. Within the framework of the Baltic Sea Troika, Germany as wellas Norway wants to stimulate Russia to common environmental measures in the Baltic Sea Region.To the fifth point:Dr Z(cid:246)pel said that it is not a coincidence that the Baltic Sea cooperation was developed from below,on initiative of different federations, non-governmental organisations, networks and companies. Heunderlined that Germany emphasizes the active and committed civil society as a further strength inthe Baltic Sea cooperation. He considers this also as a challenge to look for common aims andidentity-making orientations in the various activities.Dr Z(cid:246)pel concluded that the Baltic Sea Region is economically dynamic and culturally richsurroundings, worth living in.45THIRD SESSIONReport from Working Group 1Mr Juris Sinka, rapporteur, LatviaMr Sinka reported from the discussions in the Working Group 1. The group had a lively discussionon the subject, Mr Sinka said and underlined that Ms Sinikka Bohlin was an extremely erudite andsensitive chairman. He said that she pointed out in her introduction that the idea of having workinggroups was being implemented at the Baltic Sea Parliamentary Conference for the first time.Furthermore he underlined that the topic Trans-European Networks was not a new one since a lot ofpeoples thoughts already have been present in Europe for many centuries. Forest tracks laterbecame roads, river and seaways, railways and even airways. And all the time this movement ofhumanity in Europe developed in many respects a common or similar social, economic, ecologicaland cultural background. Including Ms Bohlin and occasionally the speaker himself, 10 people tookpart in the discussion, some taking the floor several times.Lord Clinton-Davis drew the attention to the various valuable achievements by the Westerncountries, for instance by Great Britain, in the expansion and further development of road, rail andair traffic, as well as shipping, and in the amelioration of the negative environmental influences. Heregretted that the Western achievements were hardly ever mentioned nowadays. His view was thatthe Eastern Europe States, since their recovery from Communism should have done more in thesphere of protecting the environment. People had a tendency to talk, but had failed to do somethingtangible in this respect. Former Polish Transport Minister, Boguslaw Liberadzki pointed out that infact Poland had already done a great deal in protecting the environment. The overwhelmingmajority of motor vehicles on the road were of Western or Japanese make, and unleaded petrol wasbeing used to a large amount. Mr Liberadzki spoke on the development of nine major trans-European corridors criss-crossing the continent from South to North, and from West to East. Thetrend was to make people(cid:146)s lifes easier, to cut costs and overcome border barriers. However therewere initial and running costs of the various projects. More thought should be given to jointventures between the public sector and private business. This also applied to such trans-Europeanprojects as Via Baltica.46Ms Gitte Lillelund Bech from Denmark suggested we should actively seek ways of finding thenecessary money for the various transport projects. She thought, information-sharing played anessential part in this.Mr Trivimi Velliste from Estonia said that not enough had been done to develop and complete ViaBaltica, a very important project linking Finland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland and Germany.There should also be a road link from Tallinn to St. Petersburg.Mr Axel B(cid:252)hler from Hamburg, who quoted from the international Green Report (cid:147)Baltic-21(cid:148),thought that Via Baltica only added to the pollution of the environment, Mr Sinka underlined. Oneshould take great care with new projects, which could lead, to environmental disaster. Ofteninternational finance did little to provide redress for the damage to the environment.Ms Anke Hartnagel from Germany, suggested to promote the development of vehicles with reducedemissions. She also advocated a boost to regenerative energy sources, such as windmills and use ofindustrial and domestic waste materials.Dr Henning Klostermann from Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, thought it absolutely essential withinthe shipping content (cid:150) that something effective should be done to prevent the repetition of tankerdisasters at sea, causing environmental havoc, when occurring in coastal waters. He suggested wereturned to this important topic at next years(cid:146) Baltic Sea Parliamentary Conference.Ms Bohlin counselled caution in reintroducing perhaps outdated subjects for discussion atsuccessive conferences. The Chairman also pointed to the need of taking the interests of smalltowns and countries into consideration, when traffic routes and services were being planned. MsRiitta Korhonen from Finland, expressed the view that there was a general lack of money to spendon environmental protection. The big industrial concerns should be pressurised to build upadditional funds for this purpose. Ms. Korhonen also spoke of the need to make extensive use ofmobile and other modern means of communication to bring to young people in remote areas.47Plenary Discussion:Lord Clinton-Davis, Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of EuropeLord Clinton-Davis regarded the wish to cooperate with the European Community and suggestedEurostar as an important example on what could be done on cross-border cooperation in traffic; bythe European Community and also by others. The route between London, Paris and Brussels servedas a beginning to the European infrastructure as well as the bridge between Copenhagen and Malm(cid:246)does today. It should serve as useful examples for the Baltic States. Lord Clinton-Davis underlinedthe importance of being specific when developing cooperation with the EU.Mr Edmund Wittbrodt, Minister of Education, PolandMr Wittbrodt informed the audience about the meeting between the Standing Committee and theNGO(cid:146)s, that had taken place at the conferences(cid:146) first day. The conclusion of the meeting was tolook at the possibilities to establish closer cooperation with the NGO(cid:146)s in the Baltic Sea Region. MrWittbrodt refered to Mr Arens(cid:146) wish to make the cooperation more official and practical becausecooperation is very important.Mr Axel B(cid:252)hler, HamburgMr B(cid:252)hler wanted to draw the attention, when talking about trans-European networks, to thebiannual report (cid:148)Baltic 21(cid:148) which is basic for the work at the Conference. The resolution last yearrefers to the (cid:148)Baltic 21(cid:148) and again this year. To be able to fulfil our own commitments we shouldnote the results from the Baltic 21 office, he added. The report was published this June and waspresented to the CBSS. Mr B(cid:252)hler recommended giving due consideration to sustainabledevelopment, especially when talking about infrastructure projects and make use of the Baltic 21material - it will broaden our discussions, he concluded.Ms Bettina Machaczek, HamburgMs Machaczek said that it is important to be better prepared for the Conference, which representsdifferent countries and different priorities of problems. Maybe the Standing Committee could focuson one topic in order to prepare a good working group to achieve better results, she added.Thereafter we could have NGO(cid:146)s and others with us. Ms Maschaczek concluded that it is importantto know before the Conference, what subjects are going to be discussed within the different themes.48Mr Konstantin Kosachev, RussiaMr Kosachev talked about the organisation of the Conference. As it was his first time at the BSPC,he had some ideas on how to improve the organisation of it. There are 11 national delegations. Withone country in the chair of the Conference, the 10 others could be granted the responsibility for acertain subject. It should be on a rolling basis and the other countries should achieve a report on thespecific subject from the country responsible. Mr Kosachev had thought about 10 main areas, whicha.o. could be: IT, energy, transport, trade and investments, science and education. He underlinedthat it is only a suggestion, but that it would secure that the Conference could work in manyimportant areas and that all the countries should be responsible.Mr Juris Sinka, Rapporteur Working Group 1, LatviaMr Sinka pointed out that it is a conference not an organisation. It includes various countries,various political groups and different opinions. The topics require to be raised in order to have thedifferent aspects discussed.Ms Anke Hartnagel, GermanyMs Hartnagel underlined the importance of renewable energy. She defined renewable energy as a.o.solar and wind energy and hydroelectric power. Although it will take time before we can cover ourneeds by renewable energy, it is of great importance that it is being discussed in the Baltic Sea areaand that we cooperate on the subject, Ms Hartnagel said.Mr Svend Erik Hovmand, Chairman of the Standing Committee, DenmarkMr Hovmand talked about Mr Kosachevs(cid:146) idea on dividing the tasks on infrastructure among thecountries. It is an interesting point of view and it is important to consider new working methods, MrHovmand said. It will be part of the considerations in the Standing Committee. He emphasised thatit is right, as Mr Sinka said, that an important issue could be delayed in the process, when using thissystem. Mr Hovmand offered an example on this: 2‰ years ago the BSPC proposed that the BalticSea Region was used as a pilot project to realise the Kyoto protocol with joint implementationagreement on pollution problems. He added that The BSPC has suggested that the Baltic ElectricityRing is being established. This proposal was forwarded to the Ministers of Energy, who discussed it1‰ years ago. The result is that the Baltic Electricity Ring is in the process of being established. Mr49Hovmand said that this gives the opportunity for a joint power supply, and the possibility to phaseout nuclear power stations and replace it with power supply from the Baltic Electricity Ring.Natural gas supply is another example. People are talking about creating a Baltic Natural Gas Ring,Mr Hovmand added. At the present conference there is a discussion about a third thing which hebelieved is very important: Transport by water. There is a huge growth in the Baltic area withinvestments in new harbour areas. It is of great importance that there is an awareness of thepossibility of improving waterways with small ships and better transport possibilities. There is apotential in this, which we have not been aware of. Focus should also be aimed at the infrastructure,bridges and roads. We have had the opportunity to drive on the newest bridge in the Baltic area.And there is a new possibility in the Femern Belt Bridge, the highway roads from Berlin to Polandand the Baltic area. This was mentioned, because Mr Kosachevs(cid:146) ideas are very important todiscuss and it is important to consider the possibilities present, said Mr Hovmand. He also believedit right to consider the timing as well. It is important that parliamentarians are ready to get throughwith the right ideas on the right moment, he concluded.Lord Clinton-Davis, Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, EnglandLord Clinton-Davis thought it very necessary to have specific examples on what can be done. Thebeautiful (cid:214)resund Bridge is a good example on two countries excellent cooperation, he added. Thetravelling conditions between the UK, Belgium and France are examples, which can be imitated bythe Baltic States or South Europe. It is not a question about what to be achieved, but how to achievea good infrastructure, Lord Clinton-Davis concluded.50Report from the Working Group 2:Hinrich Kuessner, rapporteur, Mecklenburg-VorpommernMr Kuessner made a brief of the discussion in the Working Group 2.The Working Group concluded that the cross-border cooperation in the Baltic Sea Region is verydiverse (cid:150) some places it is very intensive, but there is a lot to be obtained. Mr Kuessner said.The Working Group also agreed that there must be a broader cross-border cooperation, both in thecooperation between two neighbour-countries as well as in the region in general. He underlined thatit is of great importance that the cooperation process is to be initiated and legitimated through theparliaments.The EU enlargement and the building of a region in the Baltic Sea area must be carried out throughthe cross-border cooperation. The leitmotif of the cross-border cooperation must be cohesion in theRegion, Mr Kuessner said.In the framework of the discussion, there were some contributors proposing that the ResolutionCommittee should explain the importance of an intensified cross-border cooperation.First of all, the proposal from the delegation of Schleswig-Holstein on establishing an internationalsummer academie on the theme: The Baltic Sea Region in the new Europe under the commonprotection of the Baltic Sea Parliamentary Conference and the Baltic Sea Council under the GermanPresidency.Secondly, on the proposal of the German delegation, to establish a Baltic Sea Youth Foundation, tointensify the exchange of youth in the region and support it technically as well as financially.Thirdly the idea of building a (cid:146)high-speed information highway(cid:146) in the Baltic Sea Region wasbrought up, which also should be part of the resolution.The security on seaways is an important and concrete subject for the cross-border cooperation in theRegion, Mr Kuessner said. In the framework of the next conference we should discuss the thematicof the prevention and the combating of ship disasters, improvement of the safety at ships and thesecurity at sea. This is also an important and concrete improvement of the cross-border cooperation,Mr Kuessner underlined.51The importance of intensified youth exchange was also one of the aspects in the framework of thediscussion. Mr Kuessner mentioned that exchange of youth have been going on for a long time inSouth and West of the Baltic Sea area and it is therefore time to focus on integrating the exchangeof youth in the East. The cooperation of universities was also discussed in the Working Group, MrKuessner said. This should also be added as a subject. There was a proposal on amplifying thepossibilities to study in another Baltic Sea State. In addition to this, it was mentioned that theEuropean Language Year 2001 could be used for this, and also to call on the governments to reducethe language barriers in the Baltic Sea area, Mr Kuessner told.The Working Group concluded that the youth exchange subject should be mentioned in theresolution and that it should be subject to a longer discussion on discussion- and working process,Mr Kuessner said.He ended his contribution by underlining that the (cid:146)high-speed information highway(cid:146) is an importantaspect considering the communication between people in the Baltic Sea area. The new technologiesoffer new possibilities for continuous contact between people.52Plenary discussionMr Monty Sch(cid:228)del, Mecklenburg-VorpommernMr Sch(cid:228)del said that it is necessary with cross-border cooperation. What has happened in Germanyduring the summer is xenophobia. We have to counteract that tendency. The question is whetherthis should be implemented in the resolution or if it is matter of course. To prevent xenophobia it isimportant to underline that no nation is better than another. Yesterday we heard several speechesabout a friendly cooperation. Unfortunately I only speak my mother tongue, but it is of greatimportance that we are able to talk with each other in the Region, Mr Sch(cid:228)del said and added that itis the parliamentarians(cid:146) task to work for this to be an opportunity.53ClosingAfter the adoption of the Conference Resolution, Mr Hinrich Kuessner, welcomed all to the nextyears(cid:146) conference in GrasswaldtMr Edmund Wittbrodt, thanked Mr Svend Erik Hovmand for his good work in the last two years asChairman of the Standing Committee.Mr Svend Erik Hovmand, thanked all the participants for contributing to a successful Conference,and thanked Ms Sinikka Bohlin and her staff for their effort. Mr Svend Erik Hovmand handed overthe chairmanship to the Parliament of Mecklenburg-Vorpommern and wished them a successfulpreparation of the next BSPC Conference.54ANNEX 1Adoption of the resolutionThe participants of the 9th Baltic Sea Parliamentary Conference* assembled in Malm(cid:246), Sweden,September 4-5, 2000,taking note of the positive work carried out in the Council of Baltic Sea States (CBSS) and manyother regional organisations as well as of the momentum for regional and sub-regional cooperationin the Baltic Sea Area created i.a. by the inauguration of the bridge across the (cid:214)resundcall on their own parliaments and on their governments- to further strengthen the possibilities and conditions for regional and sub-regional cooperation inthe Baltic Sea area- to facilitate cross-border cooperation and establish new and effective Trans-European Networks inaddition to consolidating existing onesespecially by- promoting youth exchange and tourism in the Baltic Sea Region by creating a Baltic Sea YouthFund, based on the experience of the Baltic Sea Youth Secretariat in Kiel;- enhancing a close cooperation in the field of education and research between universities in theBaltic Sea Region in particular by establishing the Baltic Sea University Ring and an InternationalSummer Academy on the subject of "The Baltic Sea Region in the New Europe";- creating an efficient IT infrastructure including building up a high speed data-highway for thebenefit of all citizens in the entire region, thus allowing for, i.a. inter-active civic participation of all55strata of the populations, the facilitation of internal and external economic life and the enhancementof social service, such as tele-medicine, in all parts of the region;- intensifying cooperation in the field of energy, not least concerning renewable energy sources, andimproving the environment by using the flexible mechanism introduced in the Kyoto Protocol toavoid environmental dumping as well as ensuring nuclear and radiation safety;- improving transport systems around the Baltic Sea;- abolishing trade barriers including obstacles at border crossings;- creating conditions for further development of economic cooperation in the field of investmentand trade exchanging by activation of small and medium size enterprises;- stepping up collaboration in fighting organised crime and cross-border law-breaking;- making sure that due consideration is given to environmental aspects and other hazards tosustainable development by ensuring the existence and implementation of regional, sub-regional,national and local Agendas 21 and by paying attention to HELCOM strategies;- developing the relations with the European Union in general and making the best possible use ofthe benefits created by the perspective of EU enlargement and the policies of the NorthernDimension in particular;- paying more attention to the special needs of cross-border cooperation, not least the maritimeborders, and integrate it into the EU-Interreg programmes;- improving national legislation and regulations aimed at ensuring fundamental human rights andliberties in correspondence with principles contained in the charters and conventions of the UN, theCouncil of Europe and of the OSCE;56- undertaking measures promoting multilateral cooperation in order to prevent and combatcatastrophes and organise international disaster control, operations of rescuing as well as jointoperations aimed at liquidating the results of catastrophes especially by improving the safety ofships and the safety of sea routes.The participants of the 9th Baltic Sea Parliamentary Conference stress that the above-mentionedgoals could best be attained by stimulating and enhancing the inter-active civic participation inpolitical decision-making on all levels in the Baltic Sea area and decide to make that aspect ofcooperation the main theme for the 10th Baltic Sea Parliamentary Conference, which the Landtag ofMecklenburg-Vorpommern has generously offered to host on 3 (cid:150) 4 September 2001 in Greifswald.* Members of the parliaments of ̄land, Bremen, Denmark, Estonia, the Federal Republic ofGermany, Finland, Hamburg, Iceland, Karelia, Latvia, Lithuania, Mecklenburg-Vorpommern,Norway, Poland, the Russian Federation, Schleswig-Holstein, St. Petersburg, Sweden as well as ofthe Baltic Assembly, the Nordic Council and the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe,constituting the 9th Baltic Sea Parliamentary Conference, convened in Malm(cid:246) and Copenhagen onSeptember 3-5, 2000, at the invitation of the Speaker of the Swedish Parliament and under the aegisof the Regional Parliament of Sk(cid:229)ne.57ANNEX 2ParticipantsSpeakersDahl, Birgitta, Speaker of the Parliament, SwedenEllemann-Jensen, Uffe, President of Baltic Development Forum, Former Minister for ForeignAffairs, DenmarkHjelm-WallØn, Lena, Deputy Prime Minister, SwedenHovmand, Svend Erik, MP, Chairman of the Standing Committee, Nordic Council, DenmarkZ(cid:246)pel, Christoph, Dr, Representative of the CBSS Presidency, State Minister in the ForeignMinistry, GermanyParliamentary DelegationsBaltic AssemblyAndrikiene, Laima, Chairperson of the Baltic Assembly(Also representing the Parliament of the Republic of Lithuania, Seimas)Sinka, Juris, Member of the Standing Committee(Also representing the Parliament of Latvia, Saeima)Sprindzuks, Maris, (Also representing the Parliament of Latvia, Saeima)Molnika, Baiba, Secretary of the Baltic Assembly, LatviaParliament of Bremische B(cid:252)rgerschaftArnold-Cramer, UrsulaM(cid:252)tzelburg, DieterPflugradt, HelmutKrause, Walter, Higher Executive Officer58Parliament of Denmark, FolketingetBruun-Vierł, Inger MarieDegn, HelleKaalund, PerLillelund Bech, GitteParliament of Estonia, RiigikoguKirsipuu, ValveLauristin, MarjuOviir, SiiriTarvis, LaineVelliste, TrivimiVaik, Evi, Delegation SecretaryParliamentary Assembly of the Council of EuropeLord Clinton-Davis, EnglandGross, Andreas, FranceKosakivskiy, Leonid, UkraineTorbj(cid:246)rn, Kjell, Secretary - Committee on Economics and Development, FranceEuropean ParliamentRamstedt, Sten, AdministratorParliament of Finland, EduskuntaKiljunen, KimmoKorhonen, RiittaTahvanainen, S(cid:228)deEriksson, Magnus, Secretary for International Affairs, FinlandParliament of Free and Hanse City of HamburgBr(cid:252)ning, Barbara, DrB(cid:252)hler, Axel59Machaczek, BettinaStapelfeldt, Dorothee, Dr.Hoffmann-Riem, Ulrike, DirectorHeusel, Herr, DriverParliament of the Federal Republic of Germany, BundestagB(cid:246)rnsen, WolfgangHartnagel, AnkeHiller, ReinholdSchubert, Mathias, Dr.Th(cid:246)nnes, Franz, Head of DelegationMeier, Silke, SecretaryParliament of Iceland, AlthingiPÆlmason, ̋s(cid:243)lfur Gylfi, Third Vice President of AlthingiStefÆnsson, Gudmundur `rni, First Vice President of AlthingiLegislature of the Republic of KareliaLekkerev, Alexander, Vice-president of the Chamber of RepresentativesRepin, Vasily, Deputy of the Chamber of RepublicParliament of Latvia, SaeimaSinka, Juris, Member of the Standing Committe (Also representing the Baltic Assembly)Sprindzuks, Maris (Also representing the Baltic Assemby)Jankevica, Anitra, Secretary of the Baltic Assembly Latvian DelegationRazans, Andris, First Secretary, Embassy of Latvia, StockholmParliament of the Republic of Lithuania, SeimasAndrikiene, Laima, Chairperson of the Baltic Assembly (also representing Baltic Assembly)Parliament of Mecklenburg VorpommernCaffier, Lorenz60Holznagel, RenateKlostermann, Henning, Dr.Kuessner, Hinrich, Speaker, Head of DelegationSch(cid:228)del, MontyBahr, Bodo, Head of departmentLoscher, Bernd, Dr., Chief of ProtocolPÆc, Gerald, Head of DivisionTebben, Armin, Secretary GeneralNordic CouncilBackman, Turidur, IslandBennedsen, Dorte, DenmarkErlandsson, Ragnar, Vice Speaker, ̄landHellsvik, Gun, SwedenHagemann, Henrik, General Secretary, DanmarkLundberg, G(cid:246)ran, Senior Advisor, DenmarkNokken, Frida, Secretary General, DenmarkSmekal, Eva, Secretary general of the Swedish delegation of the Nordic Council, SwedenSvensson, Jerry, Secretary for the Socialdemocratic Group in the Nordic Council, SwedenWright, Marit, Political Advisor, NorwayZilliacus, Patrick, Councellor for International Affairs, FinlandParliament of Norway, StortingetHoddevik, Sverre J.Kjłlmoen, KarinNesvik, Harald T.Wilslłff-Nilssen, ̄seMyhre-Jensen, Kjell, Head of Secretariat, NorwayPolandSenateWittbrodt, Edmund, Minister of Education, Head of Delegation61Januszewski, Andrzej, Secretary of the DelegationParliament, SejmCegielska, Franciszka, Minister of HealthJaniak, Kazimierz, MPLiberadzki, Boguslaw, MPHabant, Artur, First Secretary, Polish Embassy, SwedenFederal Assembly of the Russian FederationCouncil of FederationKhripel, Gennady T.Saginov, Pavel ASpiridonov, YuriBratmaric, Larisa, Interpreter,Korastelev, Ivan S.Lillenurm, Petr, Consul, Consulate of Russia, SwedenMasalov, Vladimir, Consul-General at Consulate of Russia, SwedenState DumaChurkin, GennadyIvantjenko, Leonid A.Kosachev, Konstantin I.Zaitseva, Arina A., Staff MemberSaint Petersburg Legislative AssemblyYagya, Vatanyar, Plenipotary of L A on international relationsParliament of Schleswig-HolsteinArens, Heinz-Werner, President of the Parliament, Member of the Standing CommitteeBehm, Joachim62Ehlers, ClausFischer, RolfSpoorendonk, AnkeSteenblock, RainderK(cid:246)hler, Joachim, Dr.Schmidt-Holl(cid:228)nder, Jutta, Expert on Cooperation in the Baltic Sea AreaSch(cid:246)ning, J(cid:252)rgen, Dr., Director of the ParliamentPlieske, Max, DriverBresa, Bernhard, DriverParliament of Sweden, RiksdagenBohlin, Sinikka, Member of Standing CommitteeGranlund, MarieJohansson, MorganNordlund, HaraldPersson, BertilTorstensson, ̄sāberg, Mats, Ambassador, Head of the International DepartmentParliament of ̄landEriksson, HarryEriksson, Karl-G(cid:246)ranHolm-Johansson, Marine, Secretary, ̄landObserversBaltic Sea Chamber of Commerce AssociationM(cid:252)chler, Stephan, Vice President, SwedenBaltic Sea Commission, CPMRKarlsson, Tommy, Foreign Liason Adviser, Sweden63Baltic Sea Trade Union NetworkPoese, Thomas, Chief for International Affairs, DGB, GermanySaxØn, Tom, Secretary General of the Nordic Trade Unions NFS, SwedenCouncil of the Baltic Sea States, CBSSSokolov, Serguei O., Senior Advisor, SwedenEuropean Commissionde Largentaye, Bertrand, Administrator, BelgiumOffice of Nordic and Baltic AffairsTribble, Conrad, Coordinator of Northern European Initiative, USAStanding Committee of Parliamentarians of the Arctic RegionDalheim, Erik, NorwayState Legislative Leaders FoundationSch(cid:246)ps, Alfons, Director of European Operations, GermanyUnion of the Baltic CitiesEngstr(cid:246)m, Anders, President, SwedenUniversity of AlaskaEricsson, Karen, ProfessorInterpretersAhonen, AinoBryhni, Sibylle, GermanDuvantier, Claire, EnglishFleischhacker, Karin, GermanFluger, Lena, EnglishLindqvist, Galina, Russian64Olsen, Heide, GermanPeerless, Aase, EnglishPogrovskaja, Olga, RussianRepin, Aleksei, RussianRitter, Claus, GermanTchekhov, Alexandre, RussianZooga, Anne, EnglishInvited guestsGradin, Anita, SwedenHeimsoeth, Hans-J(cid:252)rgen, Dr., Ambassador at large, Chairman of the CSO of the CBSSKl(cid:246)ckner, Ulrich, Head of State Minister Z(cid:246)pel(cid:146)s private officeLiedholm, Percy, President, Region of Sk(cid:229)ne, SwedenLundqvist, ArnePetersson, Lars, Director International Relations, Region of Sk(cid:229)ne, SwedenPressAP KorrespondentOlsen, Jan M., Journalist, DanmarkErhvervsBladet A/SRasmussen, Peter B, Journalist, DenmarkDeutsche Press Agentur German Press AgencyEwald, R(cid:252)diger, Journalist, Schleswig-HolsteinDie WeltGoos, Diethart, Journalist, Schleswig-HolsteinFlensburger TageblattJung, Frank, Journalist, Schleswig-Holstein65Kv(cid:228)llsposten Malm(cid:246)Jan-Olof BengtssonSydsvenska DagbladetHanson, Matilda, ReporterRydØn, Daniel, JournalistThorsson, H(cid:229)kan, JournalistSłndagsavisenMorten Outzen-Jensen, JournalistTTHenrik HamrØnBengt LjungdahlPia KarlssonPeter Palmkvist(cid:214)stersj(cid:246)nytt/Probalt ABM(cid:229)rtensson, Ola, JournalistN(cid:228)slund, Sture, JournalistConference StaffMalm(cid:246) TurismEkberg, CamillaEriksson, KatarinaNordic CouncilAaltonen, Kristina Eskildsen, Rapporteur, DenmarkLindroos, P(cid:228)ivikki, Senior Advisor, DenmarkSandł, Jonna, Assistant, DenmarkSłrensen, Torkil, Journalist/Informat(cid:246)r, Denmark66Toropainen, Ulla, Assistant, DenmarkParliament of Sweden, RiksdagenAndersson, Hans, RapporteurBlecher, Lennart, Principal Administrative OfficerCarlstedt, Mats, Clerical OfficerEngstr(cid:246)m, Mikael, Clerical OfficerForsell, G(cid:246)ran, Head of the Security DepartmentJohnson, Bertil, Clerical OfficerLundqvist, Jan, Conference technicianMimon, Nina, Senior Clerical OfficerNilsson, Stefan, Security OfficerRydingstam, Maria, Higher Administrative Officer67