Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2004-12-14-Speech-2-202"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20041214.13.2-202"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, we in the Group of the Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe were very pleased to see that the Prodi Commission attached such great importance to the Lisbon objectives when it presented its draft financial estimates. We also note that improved competitiveness and increased growth in Europe are among the things that are genuinely high on the Barroso Commission’s agenda and have been so right from the start. That is something we have also seen following the clear observations made by Mr Barroso today here in plenary.
I therefore think it only natural to ask the Commission whether it will face the implications of its sharp focus on the Lisbon objectives and amend the Prodi Commission’s proposal. Is there anywhere it will allocate more resources to improve competitiveness and to create increased growth and more jobs? Are there any changes to the structure of the financial framework? Is there to be more focus upon growth-oriented policy areas? Are there things to be dispensed with?
What we have here is a large complex of legislation and proposals. I appreciate that what exists at present forms the point of departure, but it might however be interesting to hear whether there is anything to which more weight is to be given and whether there are any negative priorities. If there are to be priorities, where are the cutbacks to be made first?
When we in Parliament debate the financial estimates, we do not focus upon an expenditure ceiling, as some countries in the Council do. We do not wish to become tied up in the Council’s blinkered discussions of 1% or whatever. I am pleased that, in this House today, you have said that percentages are not being discussed in the Commission either – at any rate, not at the moment.
We must not talk about quantity, but quality. Parliament must therefore call upon the Commission to preserve a stoical calm and first of all discuss the content of EU policy. We can discuss budget ceilings subsequently. We now have a unique opportunity to consider what we want, as well as what we want the future EU to look like between 2007 and 2013, and that is an opportunity we must not waste.
As far as my own group is concerned, it is important to have the focus on research, to strengthen the common research programmes and perhaps even to consider creating a fund for basic research that can strengthen research in future technologies such as nanotechnology, allowing the EU also to be a key player. We must consider obtaining increased benchmarking of our universities in Europe in terms of a fair comparison of who does what best on a cross-border basis, and we must create healthy competition. We must look at our training programmes and see whether they take account of needs in the new Member States where, for example, many students cannot afford to travel and learn new things.
Again, it may be asked: ‘Have we obtained the correct focus in what we now have?’ This, clearly, is the debate in which we in Parliament shall engage and on which we shall work. That being said, the big battle will clearly centre upon regional policy. It is regional policy that is the difficult area. When you attended the hearings here in Parliament, you were courageous enough to express the view that some of the new countries were probably able to absorb more than 4% of gross domestic product. I shall be interested to hear whether you still hold that view, Mrs Grybauskaite, once you are Commissioner. In this area too, we shall of course look at how to make most effective use of the money and at how to create quality rather than just look to quantity. What we are able to come up with on the issue of regional policy is therefore crucial, and we appreciate, of course, that this is quite a difficult subject, including for the Council.
I hope that we can obtain a constructive dialogue and a monthly trialogue, for it is important for us to go on discussing these matters. It is quite a package that we have here."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples