Prince Charles called for the "biggest public, private and NGO partnership ever seen" to tackle climate change and halt the destruction of the world's tropical forests in a speech to MEPs on Thursday. He said any measures to tackle climate change cannot succeed "without a strong lead from Europe and its citizens". He welcomed the recent climate proposals from the European Commission and told MEPs that the "role of each and every one of you will be absolutely crucial".

 

Welcoming the Prince, Parliament's President Hans-Gert Pöttering vowed that MEPs "would try and hold EU members to the commitments they had made and to pass the new package of measures (such as promoting renewable energy and carbon capture), into law before the European elections in June 2009".

 

He paid a personal tribute to the Prince saying that "you were one of the first international opinion-leaders to draw the world's attention to the threat posed by global warming".

 

 

In his address Prince Charles painted a picture of a world where climate change has taken hold. The Prince mentioned melting of the polar ice cap telling his audience that "in the last few months we have learnt that the North Polar ice cap is melting so fast that some scientists are predicting that in seven years time it will completely disappear in summer".

 

He told MEPs that the "doomsday clock of climate change is ticking ever faster towards midnight. We cannot be anything less than courageous and revolutionary in our approach to tackling climate change".

 

He mentioned the UN's panel of climate change which stated last year "that up to two billion people worldwide will face water shortages, and up to 30 per cent of plant and animal species would be put at risk of extinction, if the average rise in temperature stabilizes between 1.5 and 2.5 degrees".

 

 

He also deplored the destruction of the world's rainforests saying "they act as a natural thermostat, helping to regulate our climate. And they sustain the lives of some of the poorest people on this Earth". On the scale of the deforestation the Prince painted a shocking picture: "every year 20 million hectares – an area the size of England, Wales and Scotland combined – are destroyed or degraded".

 

He continued on this theme saying that “unbelievable as it might seem, we are destroying our planet's air-conditioning system. But the loss of biodiversity is also terrifying. It has been compared to burning down a library of precious knowledge without first reading the books"

 

 

The Prince was emphatic on the need for both the private and public sector to play a role in tackling climate change. "Climate change presents such a threat that, uniquely in history, it will surely require the effort of every nation and every person to find and implement a solution before it is too late? asked the Prince. He added: "It is a task that calls for the biggest public, private and NGO partnership ever seen" said the Prince.

 

He also mentioned the group of major European companies who had come together to support policies in the EU that would lead to a low carbon economy. He noted that before the Bali conference on climate change they had brought together 170 global companies calling for a legally binding framework on emissions which went beyond what was agreed at Bali. 

 

The Prince finished by saying that "none of us will be forgiven by our children and grandchildren if we falter and fail".

 

 

The speech drew a standing ovation from MEPs and others in the room. As people were filing out we spoke to a couple of Members to gauge their reaction.

 

Mr Dan Jørgensen, a Danish Socialist MEP and vice chair of Parliament's Environment committee, said that "it was very much in line with what was decided by the EU and the Parliament on climate change". He also said "we need to set very high goals –both the public and the private sector".

 

Parliament's vice-president, British Conservative Mr Edward McMillan-Scott said "it was a very remarkable visit by the future King of England talking about subjects which he has been studying in detail for many years. The leadership of people like Prince Charles has been significant. I think he chose the right forum to make a speech".

 

 

 

 

Ukraine's Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko took her anti-corruption and pro-reform message to MEPs on the Foreign Affairs committee and Ukraine Delegation Monday. She thanked them for their support during the "Orange Revolution" and said she considered integration with the EU "a priority" and that a "free trade zone was very important". On energy issues and relations with Russia she said she would strive for good relations with the Kremlin but energy independence would be Kiev's goal.

 

Jacek Saryusz-Wolski, the Polish EPP-ED Member who chairs the Foreign Affairs Committee, welcomed her saying that Ukraine is an important, crucial strategic partner for the EU and that a report by the Committee strongly advocates Ukraine's integration into the Union.

 

Romanian MEP Adrian Severin - the Socialist chair of Parliament's delegation to the Ukraine, said that the last elections there could be interpreted as "the will of Ukrainians to see democratic progress and to come closer to European structures and institutions".

 

Both stressed the need for economic, social, constitutional and judicial reforms.

 

 

Ms Tymoshenko told MEPs that she would make greater transparency and the fight against corruption the centrepiece of her mandate. She said that "power should become open" and that she will take concrete steps to combat corruption including a list of suggestions from businesses. 

 

She also pledged to simplify the tax system and encourage the creation of small and medium size enterprises to boost employment and ease inequality.

 

On the political state of Ukraine she reassured MEPs that the emergency election was a sign of democracy, not a sign of dysfunction and that the next Presidential elections would be in two years time.

 

 

Ms Tymoshenko was fulsome in her praise of the Parliament. She told MEPs, “I remember well the MEPs wearing orange ties in Kiev supporting the orange revolution" and that "only we and the EP believed in the success of the early elections".

 

 

The Ukrainian premier was clear about where she thought her country should be orientated: “We are historically a European country" and "I cannot see any alternative to Europe."

 

She said that she would devote a lot of her time to EU policy and a lot of the government's policies would be "filled with EU aspirations". She asked for cooperation from the EU in electronic measures to control smuggling as well as for the EU to be Kiev's "strategic partner on security".

 

On energy policy she told MEPs she would like to see one energy market shared with the EU and would like to see more foreign investment. On Russia Ms Tymoshenko said, "we will do our best to have the best relations with Russia, but Ukraine’s national interests will be upfront, and energy independence will be important for us". She finished by saying "for my team the Orange Revolution is a principle for life".

 

 

 

"All cultures flow into one recipient that forms human civilisation." These are the words of the Grand Mufti of Syria, Ahmad Badr al-din Hassoun, when he spoke to us during his visit to the European Parliament in Strasbourg. He was invited by EP President Hans-Gert Pöttering to the first plenary session of 2008 to mark the year of intercultural dialogue. In his speech he praised the "the culture of mankind". In an interview, Dr Hassoun expanded on his spiritual message.

 

Dr Hassoun, Syria's senior Sunni Muslim cleric, came to the Parliament with a delegation of representatives of other faiths. One of the Christian Bishops who accompanied him was Antoine Odo, President of the Chaldean Bishops of Syria. Bishop Odo was kind enough to act as an interpreter from Arabic to French for our interview.

 

 

Yesterday I said there is one civilisation and many cultures. Civilisation is like a huge vessel into which all cultures flow. Culture may be, say, French or German, but all cultures flow into one recipient which forms human civilisation. But spiritual culture, be it, say, Christian or Muslim, gives humanity its moral dimension. Human civilisation is based on morality and reason. Reason builds the material part of life, and morality builds love between us and binds man to man as brothers, culturally and spiritually.

 

 

In a world which has become a small village we may benefit from all cultures and gather them together in one civilisation for the good of all. Once, a person could only hear a preacher or a sermon in his own place of worship. Today it is possible to receive thousands of TV channels, each one delivering a culture. Our children are able to hear the whole world. We cannot deny them from being universal in their culture, but at the same time one must defend one's own identity so as to protect the beauty of the world.

 

Here the dialogue of cultures becomes a route of happiness for man, a road which takes us away from conflict. Hence we cannot make war for one civilisation or one culture but we will help each other to build the civilisation of the world.

 

 

The problem is not one caused by men or religions but by politicians who have misinterpreted the religious texts: the Bible, the Torah and the Koran. It is man who is sacred; not any piece of land, any church, the Wall of Lamentations or any mosque. In the Torah, Koran and the Bible we read that the finger of a little child is more sacred than the entire earth. This child is the work of God; he who destroys that attacks God. Destroy all the religious buildings, we can rebuild them! Destroy a creature of God, who can give him life again?

 

 

The prophets came for man, and the angelic missions are for man. What is so strange is that we have transformed the holy message to justify killing man. We have said there is a holy people, and an unholy people; a holy place and an unholy place. God alone is holy. If one destroys a work of Michelangelo what will we think of him - ignorant, violent, animal like without respect for human values?

 

But if one destroys the creature God himself created? Those who build landmines and weapons of mass destruction are the enemies of human civilisation, because they kill man. I think perhaps Alfred Nobel tried to redeem some of the evil caused by his invention of dynamite by creating the Nobel Prize.  

 

Tell us about your role in encouraging the peaceful coexistence of religious communities 

 

When I was appointed the Grand Mufti of Syria, people thought I was only Mufti of the Muslims. However, after my first speech, transmitted via radio and TV, I became Mufti of the Muslims, Christians, secularists and all citizens of my country.

 

I don't limit myself to one community. I asked all spiritual leaders to be fathers to every Syrian citizen without closing themselves to their own community. I am trying to spread this approach all over the Arabic and Muslim world and then to the whole world. Spiritual leaders ought to be universal, not limited to their community or confession. The Pope is not only responsible for the Catholics but for all mankind, a Mufti is not only responsible for Muslims but for the whole world. 

 

 

 

The aim of Montenegro is to be ready to join the European Union by 2012. That was the goal Montenegro's PM Milo Djukanovic spelled out to MEPs on the Foreign Affairs Committee Monday. The former basketball player has led the former ex-Yugoslav state since 1991 and championed the successful "Yes" vote in a referendum on independence in 2006. We caught up with Mr Djukanovic and asked him about Montenegro's EU hopes, Kosovo and why the country is happy using the euro.

 

 

At the time when we were struggling to become independent we were saying very clearly that we wanted to take charge of our future, which we have always known lies in Europe.

 

Why do we want to be part of the EU? It is simply because we share the same values. It is not, as it might seem, that a small state like ours wants to get something from pre-accession funds. We believe in our own capacity.

 

 

We want Montenegro and the entire Western Balkans to be part of the security, political and economic system of the EU. In the Balkans we have cyclically had crises including the most recent one. That is why it is in the best interests not only of the countries of the West Balkans but of the EU too to have these countries in the Union.

 

 

Everyone brings something special and so will Montenegro - even a state as small as ours can enrich a union which is already as rich as the EU. A value that we are proud of - particularly having in mind the regional context - is multiculturalism. It has not always been regarded as an asset in the region that we live in but as a handicap in the decade that started in 1990. That is why for such a long time we had fanatical religious wars there.   

 

Though Montenegro is the smallest state in the region, it has managed to preserve peace, strengthen its multiethnic harmony, win the confidence of the international community and of foreign investors and develop very dynamically. The natural beauty of Montenegro is that we have an extremely beautiful Adriatic coast with a picturesque hinterland, high mountains, deep canyons and big lakes.

 

 

 

It is inevitable. Sooner or later Serbia has to come to terms with the policy mistakes that it has made during a number of decades. Regrettably there was no readiness on either side for an agreed solution, so what followed was a declaration of independence by Kosovo. Many important member states of the EU and the international community as a whole have already recognised Kosovo so I do not believe that any serious person would like the wheel of history to go back.

 

We are acting rather cautiously for two reasons. The first is that we are a neighbour of both Kosovo and Serbia, so we should help rather than feed fuel to the fire by making rush moves. The second is that we have been independent for only two years now and we have achieved this independence by leaving the Union with Serbia. Our independence has left some traumas on the Serbia-Montenegro relationship.

 

 

The Milosevic regime tried to tackle economic problems by printing worthless money without our knowledge. At some point we decided to protect ourselves and introduced the Deutschmark on Montenegro’s territory. Later the Deutschmark was replaced in Germany and indirectly we also became users of euro. This does not mean that we are in European monetary union although we are taking a very responsible attitude towards the use of euro.

 

We have seen huge benefits from having euro. Firstly, it’s good that we have abandoned any illusion that you can live and thrive on inflation which was characteristic in ex-Yugoslavia. And secondly, we are much more attractive for foreign investors because European investors are using their own currency.

 

 

 

 

Pakistani lawyer Asma Jahangir is the UN's Special Rapporteur on the Freedom of Religion or Belief. On 18 June she spoke to a plenary sitting of the European parliament where she delivered a call for great understanding between religions. Whilst in Strasbourg we caught up with her and asked her about the role. She speaks of the need to get people to interact naturally with one another and believes that the "dignity of human beings must lie at the centre of all freedoms".

 

 

I believe that we should not have just an academic approach to it, but an activist one. Intercultural dialogue is all about opening up spaces for a variety of diverse voices to be heard and diverse ways of living. It is not just about talking but also about interaction, it is creating an environment where you naturally interact with each other, rather than putting different races and religions in different "ghettos".

 

 

When people feel that they will not be heard or understood, they resort to violence. In this sense, interaction is very important in order to prevent violence. Europe, as well as the global community, should also give a very clear message that violence cannot be given impunity - especially to those governments inclined to give impunity to violence committed "in the name of religion". Europe has a leading role to play, as it is a largely democratic region and can thus show us how you can deepen democracy by being truly pluralistic.

 

 

They are all equally important. The media have played an important role and have very rarely had a negative role. Culture is another way of promoting intercultural dialogue. I talked this morning about how films in India have done a great service for public education on communal harmony. Education is also very important, because it is through education that people form their personalities. So is family: it is not just about upbringing, but about preventing families and communities from putting restrictions, beyond a certain level of which you cannot have exchanges.

 

For example, arranged marriages still exist and are often a taboo, even in many so-called civilised societies. It is also important that politicians are open and talk openly about things. The dignity of human beings must lie at the centre of all freedoms - whether it is religions freedom, freedom of expression or freedom from being exploited.

 

 

I worked in the past with one of the most underprivileged sections in the society and for them their dignity is as important as the dignity of anyone else who is more privileged. If you humiliate someone - regardless of colour or religion- the kind of feeling they have is universal. So in that way we are all the same. However, we can be different in our beliefs, our approaches to life and our spiritual ideas. So we are the same in many respects, but also different.

 

Europe is a very privileged region and citizens have a lot of skills. The citizens have first of all to be the leaders of their political leadership rather than the other way round. Ordinary citizens are the ones that should be showing the direction, bringing forward the right role models even if it means taking unpopular stands. It is more possible for citizens in Europe to do it than elsewhere.

 

 

The media will bring to the people what the people want to see. If there is a conflict in dialogue, the media will pick it up. If it is a boring dialogue or a dialogue where people are batting each other's back, the media is not likely to pick it up. When people have done creative work, the media has in general picked it up. Films have been made on even very small local movements that have done heroic work.

 

 

I am optimistic because wherever I have been I have seen that the vast majority of people are willing to live in diversity. It is often a minority that has taken all the others hostage. Therefore I think that when governments and public opinion makers make strategies, they have to give voice to that majority that is against violence, against discrimination and against religious persecution.