Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-12-18-Speech-3-038"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20021218.3.3-038"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Madam President, Mr President-in-Office of the Council, Mr President of the Commission, Commissioner, various aspects of the enlargement that lies before us are the subject of public debate, and one of them has to do with what the whole thing is costing. Can the advantages of enlargement really be expressed in euros and cents? Surely not! This enlargement will yield substantially more than can be communicated or depicted in sums of money. In any case, the whole process of European unification and cooperation between the peoples of Europe is something far greater than that, and bears no relation to the public conception of how much it all costs. I want to quote an example. What we spend on the European Union as a whole, on our work to promote research, economic prosperity, solidarity with others, young people, the protection of the environment, transport, the common foreign and security policy and justice and home affairs policy amounts to some EUR 100 billion per annum. In 2001, EUR 125 billion were spent on defence within the European Union, and as much as EUR 133 billion this year. So which is better – to keep putting away money for defence or to press on with a peaceful development such as that which is offered as an opportunity for the continent of Europe?
There is nothing romantic about financial issues. We cannot approach them solely with a fine image of a beautiful future in our minds; rather, we have to look at the facts of the situation and have frank discussions with the public, which knows that this is of course a challenge that will demand something of all of us. It was, however, a good sign that it became clear in Copenhagen, where negotiations about money had to be carried on under these difficult conditions, that you members of the Council were at least able to agree on a certain outline. You are of course aware that we, being the second arm of the budgetary authority, also have a part to play in all this. We will enter into a constructive and positive dialogue in order to deal with the relevant matters.
We can take a positive approach to the initial evaluation of the Copenhagen financial resolutions. You have taken on board much of what we in this House had suggested. The financial package remains in a fixed framework, one that can be defended to the outside world without resorting to eloquent blandishments, but it still, of course, contains a few things that we need to talk about. There is the mysterious category X, which sounds like something menacing out of the X-Files or some such science fiction. We have to discuss what this is actually intended to do. We also have to talk about how things are to carry on after 2007 because you too have passed resolutions that go well beyond the financial perspective for the next two years. We have to have talks about this. This Parliament forms part of the budgetary authority. We will engage with you in a debate on these matters. Let me sum up, however, speaking also as a budget expert who is accustomed to keeping a very close eye on what money is spent, where it is spent, and how it is spent, by saying that we will take a very positive line on this enlargement as a whole. We will also put the Budget under the microscope and examine it very carefully. We will monitor what can be expected of our present Member States and of the candidate countries. What is important is that this European continent should have a sound foundation on which to grow together, and a sound foundation is also about sound financial provision, on which we will come to an understanding together."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples