Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-01-19-Speech-3-227"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20000119.8.3-227"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Madam President, I speak as someone who is in support of a tax on speculative capital movements across currency borders. It seems to me blindingly self-evident that some action is necessary. In the last 30 years, the volume of currency transactions has increased by 83 times: firstly, total global reserves of all central banks barely amounts to one day of foreign exchange trading; secondly, annual global trade in real goods and services equals just three-and-a-half days of foreign exchange markets out of 350, that is, 1% of capital movements are for trade in goods and services and 99% are for speculation. The size, unpredictability and irrationality of the global foreign exchange markets have made it harder and harder to manage national and regional economies. Computer-controlled selling programmes turned a random blip into an avalanche, burying jobs, lives and industries across the globe.
The only arguments against it are: firstly, it would impair the efficiency of the foreign exchange market – a little fanciful in light of the financial feeding frenzies we have seen that have destroyed jobs throughout the world, in East Asia, Europe and Latin America. Mr Chirac has described those who engage in this as the Aids virus of the world economy. What is necessary is to throw some sand into the wheels of the currency speculators, stockbrokers and option traders. Of course, this cannot be done in one country; it cannot be done within the single currency area, but it could be done at international level with global cooperation. Europe, Japan and the US – the euro, the yen and the dollar, would constitute, in my opinion, such a block.
I am disappointed in the EPP. I thought at least they read the resolutions they were going to vote on. Yes, I am in favour of such a tax, but it is not what we are going to vote on tomorrow. What we are going to vote on tomorrow is to ask the Commission to study the matter, to look at what steps and what conditions would be necessary for the introduction of such a tax.
Equally I understand the Commissioner failing to endorse such a tax, but I cannot understand why he failed to have the courage to welcome the opportunity to demonstrate the truth of his position by a study of the issue. There is nothing so closed as a closed mind. The tax has the support of 47% of the people in the UK, according to a recent survey by War on Want. In France it has had enormous resonance, particularly when linked to a demand to use the proceeds to help the Third World out of its debt and poverty.
This issue can no longer be ignored by Parliament, the Council or the Commission. There is now a weight of public opinion demanding an answer more sophisticated than: "It has not been done before". In the new millennium, with new global problems requiring new global solutions, they need to give good arguments why it cannot be done now, rather than why it has not been done in the past."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples