Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-05-17-Speech-3-022"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20000517.2.3-022"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, the report is self-contradictory. Paragraph 14 supports the Stability Pact’s demand that price stability should always precede employment-related considerations. Elsewhere, the desire is for higher employment and more democratic influence upon economic policy. However, inflation should always, of course, be between zero and two per cent. This is something that is supported, even though inflation has only stood at that rate for a period of six years in post-war Germany and Denmark. It is now quite certain, however, that this state of affairs will always be best for all countries at all times. We no longer have any need for elected representatives to devise the right policy mix. We have a Central Bank which establishes interest rates on the basis of inflation. In this way, the euro is allowed to depreciate and interest rates are increased with the result that there may be lower rates of growth and increased unemployment. It is worse than the sacred cows in India, yet the report does not protest against this. In paragraph G, on the other hand, a new sacred cow is to be found: that of high taxation. Social security arrangements must be critically examined and social expenditure reduced, but savings can also be made on social expenditure by making higher employment the top economic objective. In that way, people receiving cash benefits and unemployment benefit will be able to exchange these for proper wages. That is an alternative recipe for economic policy, but one which is contrary to the Treaty. The balance of trade deficit is normally to be no more than one per cent of GNP, irrespective of whether the money is used for investments, which can subsequently produce much larger deficits again. This would seem to be something which no amount of elections in the Member States or in the EU Parliament can change. This is absurd. It runs counter to all experience and is a denial of the principle of democracy which unites our countries and which means that voters can go to the polls and vote in favour of higher employment, even if inflation might, as a result, occasionally rise above the two per cent mark."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples