Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-05-17-Speech-3-016"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20000517.2.3-016"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, I would like to congratulate the rapporteur on his report and I am pleased that the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs, which is to negotiate, for the first time, with the troika of EU Finance Ministers on the broad outlines of economic policy, will enter into these negotiations with a report that will attract a broad consensus. We all know that Lisbon brought a fresh wind of change, and it would only be to the good if the broad outlines of economic policy were to exude more of the spirit of the Lisbon EU Summit. The main issue facing the European Union, combating unemployment that is, is still not being treated as the most important aspect of the broad outlines of economic policies. After all, the cost of unemployment in the European Union is estimated to be 12% of European GDP. Therefore, the European Union is right to make full employment its goal.
What concerns me most is that the broad outlines of economic policy are still lacking in commitment when it comes to taking advantage of increased investment activity. We are certainly doing the right thing in aiming for structural reform of the goods, services, capital and labour markets. However, whilst we do not yet know what effects structural reforms of this kind will have on employment, we do know what the effects of investment-backed growth are. We know that public investment can boost growth and employment as well. That is why we should welcome the introduction of quantitative targets for growth and employment quotas, for they supplement quantitative targets and benchmarking for investments.
I also regret the fact that the targets set at Lisbon – and consequently, those set in relation to the broad outlines of economic policy as well – are not qualitative in nature. Surely this could only benefit Europe, which wants to be the most competitive zone in the whole world. Nor is there any indication whatsoever as to what level of investment as a share of GDP we need to aim for in what time frame, in order to produce a sustainable upturn. The current upward trend is encouraging, especially since the German and Italian economies, which account for half of the net product in euroland, are at last starting to move. This is a perfect illustration of how interdependent and interwoven the European national economies are, for they have not exactly acted as engines of growth on the European economy as a whole.
Consequently, we are aware that we need a form of economic government in Europe. Europe must sing from the same hymn sheet when it comes to economic policy. We therefore need better coordination than we have had hitherto. Hence, I hope that the broad outlines of economic policy will be given substance, so as to render the language of the Lisbon decisions more comprehensible, and enable a timetable to be set. Of course, we must support the rapporteur in his desire for something we have repeatedly called for ourselves: what we need is an interinstitutional agreement between the Council, the Commission and Parliament, so as to overcome the democratic deficit in Economic and Monetary Union."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples