Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-10-21-Speech-1-033"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20021021.4.1-033"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, President of the Commission, ladies and gentlemen, today, then, the two pillars of the economic and monetary system, namely the Stability and Growth Pact on the one hand and the European Central Bank on the other, are being called into question, simultaneously, for the same reasons: intransigence on the part of those in charge and lack of flexibility with regard to means. The diagnosis is clear, however, and the remedies are within our reach.
The slowdown in growth has intensified over the past few months and the euro-zone deficit has risen from 0.2% of GDP in the year 2000 to 1.4% in 2001. While companies are desperately in need of funding, the directors of the European Central Bank, confronted with the threat of deflation, have shown themselves to be intransigent and blinkered, refusing to lower interest rates, as if inflation were the threat. It is true that the only mandate they have been given is to combat this threat. Economic development and social progress are not their concern.
As for the Stability and Growth Pact – and I would put ‘growth’ in inverted commas – the supporters of a federal and bureaucratic Europe, faced with delays in the implementation of structural reforms at a time when there was growth but the governments were run by social democrats, aim to penalise governments that have inherited a difficult situation and intend to reduce taxes and charges to relaunch the economy and implement structural investments. This theoretical threshold, however, contrary to the powers granted to the European Central Bank or the rules on the euro, has never been the subject of popular consensus.
As the Members of the Commission have suggested, we could easily postpone the reduction of the deficit by two or three years, as we all know it is easier to reduce the deficit during a period of growth. The defenders of the dogma, however, as we have seen once again today, are opposed to this because in the eyes of federalists, it is one of the main symbols of the supranational integration that has been achieved. I am telling you – I did not interrupt you, Mr Cohn-Bendit, please grant me the same courtesy, you have ample opportunity to speak – you are free to ignore these problems, to turn a blind eye. These problems foreshadow many others, as proof is currently being provided that here, as elsewhere, the freedom and responsibility of the Member States remain the building blocks of realistic European construction. That is what is at stake and that is what will have to be settled."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples