Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/1999-10-26-Speech-2-105"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"1999-10-26"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:ECB annual report2
dcterms:Language	"da"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.19991026.3.2-105"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:1999-10-26-Speech-2-1062
lpv:speaker	lp:Ole Krarup2
lpv:spokenAs	substitute; PETI (1999-10-08--2001-09-09)3 substitute; Committee on Legal Affairs and the Internal Market (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 substitute; Delegation to the EU-Malta Joint Parliamentary Committee (1999-09-29--2002-01-14)3 member; Committee on Citizens' Freedoms and Rights, Justice and Home Affairs (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 member_of_the_bureau; EDD (1999-07-20--2001-12-10)3 member; Delegation to the EU-Slovenia Joint Parliamentary Committee (1999-09-28--2002-01-14)3 unknown; Folkebevægelsen mod EU (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 member; Delegation for relations with South-east Europe (1999-09-28--2002-01-14)3
lpv:translated text	"In a debate like this about this important institution known as the European Central Bank, two starting points might be taken. One can talk about what is apparent, that is to say the surface details; or one can talk about what is real. The European Central Bank’s mode of functioning is to stay on the surface. It is a question of regulations and rules of procedure. We are conducting a rather shadowy debate here, and it is also interesting what the rapporteur has written in the explanatory statement, namely that the European Parliament “is responsible both for receiving and debating the annual report of the ECB and for monitoring the ECB”. There is no basis for this. Neither Article 113 of the Treaty nor Article 15 of the Statute give Parliament any powers other than the power to talk. So we can talk, then, and come up with comments about openness, as my excellent Swedish colleague has done, and I concur fully with the criticism of the culture of secrecy. But the reality is the European Central Bank as a political tool, and this House believes that the question of the euro and its establishment as an important institution is a matter which is over and done with. It is not! It is a success, writes the rapporteur at the start of the report. Success according to what criteria? Is it a criterion of success that the exchange rate has fallen since the euro was established? And, if one considers social criteria such as unemployment, it hits you right in the eye that the three North European countries which are outside the single currency (namely Denmark, Sweden and Great Britain) have significantly lower unemployment than certain areas in the EU, where it is catastrophically high. Is this success? The next step consists of referenda in the Scandinavian countries, and these will perhaps introduce a different agenda."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph