Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-12-03-Speech-3-095"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20031203.7.3-095"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Madam President, I am surprised that in this debate we are talking only about the Pact. The problem is not so much the Pact. The problem is that we are in a monetary union and we do not have an economic union. Some people have called the Pact stupid. I believe nonetheless that the Commission has demonstrated a certain degree of intelligence in its ability to interpret it.
I am surprised, however, that some people are talking about referring the matter to the Court of Justice and that no one has ever considered referring to the Court of Justice other violations of the Treaty committed on an ongoing basis by practically all of the members of the euro zone, when they did not consider their economic policy to be an issue of common interest, as the Treaty suggests. That is the root of the problem before us. The Stability Pact is only the rule at the end of the process that allows the points to be counted. The Stability Pact never describes how to play the game, and the game can only be a team game. The Stability Pact is called stupid or rigid. It is much less so than the competitive devaluations that prevailed before the transition to the euro. However, it is not enough on its own.
Thus, I believe that we must look at three aspects. From the point of view of the economic policies, we have the strategic tool we need to ensure new growth in Europe: the Lisbon strategy. We do not have the tool for its implementation and it is certainly not the Stability Pact that will be used to implement this strategy. This is what we must consider. Some people have proposed a strategy for major work. However, the ministers for the economy and finance have yet to decide to finance it. Everyone is talking about coordination but it only comes to the forefront when it enables France and Germany to unite against the Commission. That is not
coordination, which is the coordination that should enable the maximum benefit to be derived from the euro zone.
The second aspect relates to the dialogue with the Central Bank. When the Central Bank talks, over and over again, about structural reforms, the governments do not listen to it; another form of dialogue with the governments must be found.
Finally, we must look to the work of the Convention in order to make progress in relation to the results in the IGC and consolidate the Commission’s power as regards the implementation of an economic union."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples