Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-03-13-Speech-4-075"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20030313.3.4-075"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
The Friedrich report is correct on two counts: first of all, in stating that the current voting system in the ECB Governing Council (‘one member, one vote’) will be impossible to maintain following the enlargement of the euro area; and secondly, in adding that the reform proposed today by the ECB itself (division of countries into groups, with differentiated rotations) is unclear, complex and also extremely difficult to operate.
This report, however, is forgetting two important points: firstly, the ‘one member, one vote’ system was deliberately introduced into the Treaty of Maastricht in order to present the model, supposedly attractive to the electorate, of a monetary union operating in an egalitarian way; secondly, this model is already not working very well, even before enlargement, and is the main reason for the ECB’s inertia in the face of the problems of the largest economy in the area, Germany.
The reform proposed by the ECB, under its technical exterior, is therefore far from harmless. The alternative suggested by Mr Friedrich (introducing weighting according to population), for its part, calls into question a fundamental principle of equality adopted solemnly by the people. That is why we are asking for more than just a hurried debate."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples