Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2004-03-31-Speech-3-043"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20040331.1.3-043"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Mr President, may I, too, congratulate the Irish presidency on the way it has handled the IGC negotiations. The Taoiseach referred just now to the importance of give and take in these negotiations. I return to the issue of give and take in relation to one specific point – the budgetary powers of the European Parliament.
The text of the Convention involved a bit of give and take. We, as a Parliament, have given up our right jointly to decide by interinstitutional agreement with the Council on the financial perspectives and simply, instead, give our assent to those perspectives. In exchange, we have taken the right to have the final say within those ceilings and within a margin of manoeuvre on every item of expenditure – what was previously obligatory and non-obligatory. That is a balanced, fair package with give and take.
Some finance ministers are arguing only for take on their side and no give. They would reduce Parliament to giving just an opinion on the financial perspectives and they would also place limits on the other aspects of our budgetary powers. That, frankly, is not acceptable to the European Parliament. It would be one of
red lines – we, too, can have red lines.
I turn to what 'Harry Pottering' said on behalf of the PPE-DE Group. He said that his Group is altogether in favour of the Constitution. I am delighted to hear that in his Group, the British Conservatives are in favour of the Constitution, because that is not what some of them said in a debate of the House of Commons yesterday, nor what Jonathan Evans said in a debate with me on BBC television last Friday. They are going to oppose the Constitution, indeed, they even announced in the House of Commons that they will use every parliamentary device they can to thwart it. They are also stirring up scare stories about the Constitution. They are alleging that it creates a centralised superstate with all powers handed over to Brussels, where Brussels will be able to overrule national policy in every area of governance. We, in this House, know that is not true. They are telling fibs and trying to stir up the Eurosceptism that is latent in much of the British press and in parts of public opinion to their electoral advantage. We cannot let them get away with this.
We must have a debate based on the facts and not the myths. I hope that 'Harry Pottering' will sort out his Group – wave his magic wand, perhaps – and ask those Members who apparently want to belong to his very federalist group in the European Parliament to draw the consequences of that. Under our Rules of Procedure, you join a political group on the basis of political affinity. I wonder what affinity there is between the British Conservatives and the bulk of the PPE on this fundamental question. There seems to be none, and I invite the PPE-DE to have a vigorous internal debate on this matter."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples