Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2004-12-16-Speech-4-074"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2004-12-16"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Explanations of vote2
dcterms:Language	"pt"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20041216.9.4-074"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2004-12-16-Speech-4-0752
lpv:speaker	lp:Sérgio Ribeiro2
lpv:spokenAs	substitute; Delegation to the ACP-EU Joint Parliamentary Assembly (2004-09-15--2005-01-11)3 unknown; Coligação Democrática Unitária (PCP-PEV) (2004-07-20--2005-01-11)3 substitute; TRAN (2004-07-21--2005-01-11)3 member; PECH (2004-07-21--2005-01-11)3 member; Delegation to the EU-Mexico Joint Parliamentary Committee (2004-09-15--2005-01-11)3 member; EUL/NGL (2004-07-20--2005-01-11)3 member; REGI (2004-07-21--2005-01-11)3 member; Temporary committee on policy challenges and budgetary means of the enlarged Union 2007-2013 (2004-10-14--2005-01-11)3
lpv:translated text	". This proposal to reject the budget for 2005, which my group put forward and to which I made a significant contribution, is not only appropriate but also consistent. It helps to clarify the responsibilities of those political forces which deal out criticism but do not match it with action. I therefore regret the rejection of the rejection. The proposal for rejection is appropriate, because this is the first full year of the enlarged EU, with its additional cohesion requirements, and a key year in the debate on the Financial Perspectives for 2007-2013. It is therefore unacceptable to produce a Community budget for 2005 that has only been set above 1% of the Community GNI (by thousandths of a per cent) for psychological reasons, while it hides its clear concordance with the objectives of the signatories to the ‘Letter of the Six’ to continue the 2004 budget, the lowest in relative terms since 1987. It is consistent, because we previously tabled a rejection of the budget for 2000 at the beginning of the current financial framework, and five years later our criticisms have been confirmed: insufficient funds for economic and social cohesion; underfunding and a lack of suitable programmes in the employment, social, environmental and cooperation fields; problems of execution and lack of transparency; and especially a budget subordinated to the dictates of the Stability and Growth Pact and to making ‘savings’, so as to finance enlargements as well as other priorities, such as war and propaganda, with the same financial resources."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph