Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-03-11-Speech-2-260"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20030311.10.2-260"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, we are currently engaged in a debate over the breaking of the Stability and Growth Pact. This mainly concerns just three countries, namely France, Germany and Portugal. We should remember that, when considering the budget or any other subject, we must not fail to see the wood for the trees.
The three countries with the highest deficits have one thing in common. They have all had socialist governments. I would add that Germany still has a socialist government. These governments have been lax on public spending and have failed to implement reforms which could have achieved savings. They have wasted the margins for manoeuvre achieved through the growth in the years 2000/2001. We are now dealing with the bitter consequences of this.
This particular tree must not obscure our vision. The real problem is the general decline in public balances in the eurozone. This stood at less than 2.4% of GDP in 2002, close to the 3% criterion.
The main cause of this is the slowdown in the growth rate, and the tide is not yet turning, even slowly. This goes against the somewhat unrealistic assertions of the reports we are considering this evening. One of the possible causes of this slowdown is the economic climate. The main cause, however, is to be found in the huge public payments and the lack of structural flexibility. No solutions have yet been found for the latter. In this respect, we must break the taboo and ask whether in fact the euro itself forms part of the rigid structures holding back growth. In view of the marked differences in performance between the eurozone and the countries outside the euro, the question certainly needs to be asked.
Given that we are losing ground, should the Stability and Growth Pact be made more flexible? I am aware that the response from the Commission, the European Central Bank and even the last Ecofin Council was overwhelmingly negative, although a number of minor modifications were put forward. With respect to both the Stability and Growth Pact and foreign policy, the European Union, as usual, does not want to face reality. Instead it wants to paper over the ways in which we are slipping behind on meeting fundamental criteria.
In our opinion, we should not lose sight of the objective of completely eliminating public deficits. This is certainly a laudable aim. We think, however, that the French Government is right to maintain their programme of reducing taxation in order to avoid aggravating the current crisis. We have to address a situation we have inherited and that is not of our making. We must at least try to do so in an intelligent way."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples