Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-01-12-Speech-3-013"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20050112.3.3-013"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:translated text |
"I should now like to present to you our view of the financial perspectives. The Luxembourg Presidency has rightly decided to put everything into striving to reach an agreement on the financial perspectives before the end of June 2005. It is right to do so, because failure to reach an agreement in time will lead to significant difficulties for the preparation of the programmes concerned.
At the end of 2003, the Commission initiated a reflection process on the experience that has been gained, in order to identify possible changes and improvements that might help us to implement the Pact more efficiently. Convinced that the common interest commands that everybody comply with every rule, the Commission has been in contact with the various European bodies responsible for thinking together and for exploring together the most promising avenues, such as those tabled in our Communication of September 2004. The Presidency’s contribution will be instrumental in engendering a consensus of opinion. We are already expecting such a consensus at the Ecofin Council on 18 January. The Commission will thus be able to put forward practical proposals to improve the implementation of the Pact and this in time for the discussions at the European Council in March.
It strikes me as important, however – at a time when a final negotiation might get underway – to point out certain salient facts. We cannot have more Europe with fewer financial resources. The Commission’s proposal has not fallen out of the sky; it is the result of commitments agreed by the EU during the European Councils. Nowadays, the Commission does not ask that the Union be granted funding for new projects, but usually that it be granted funding for commitments already made; Member States must honour the commitments that they have already made.
)
I should like, if I may, to point out certain issues on which I feel that the Union must not compromise. The first of these is cohesion. Ladies and gentlemen, without solidarity there is no Union. There might be something else, but not a Union. Enlargement has had a far-reaching impact on solidarity. The Union has new regions lagging behind in development, and some of the less prosperous old regions still need support. Financial solidarity is therefore all the more necessary given that regions lagging behind in development have the greatest scope for growth in competitiveness and job creation. We must not disappoint the new EU Members, which have the right to active solidarity from the entire Union.
Secondly, we must not forget the question of competitiveness. With regard to the Lisbon Strategy, I said that massive investment in research and education was essential. Indeed, European level expenditure very often brings more reward than national level expenditure without coherence. I should also add trans-European networks to the list of priorities, given that the infrastructure that connects Europe is still in decline.
The third crucial aspect of the financial perspectives is that of security. The action programme agreed at the European Council has major financial implications. The programme known as the ‘Hague Programme’ has financial implications. This means more action at European level so that the financial burden and collective security can be shared better among the Member States. The citizens of Europe expect us to have the ability to work together. One Member State on its own, even the most powerful, cannot guarantee the best possible security if it does not form part of a joint, European-level effort. The bottom line is that we cannot have more Europe with less money. I hear people from time to time calling for a freeze on Community budgets below the level of the 2006 budget. Let us be clear on this matter: that would be a Europe that reneges on its commitments.
I wish to state clearly that the Commission would wish to have nothing to do with a Europe of backtracking, a Europe of mediocrity, a Europe of reduced aims. This is why I am delighted that the Luxembourg Presidency will do everything in its power to reach a compromise agreement this term. Some people will say that this will be difficult, even unlikely. I honestly believe that the longer we leave this, the more difficult it will be. We therefore support the Luxembourg Presidency in this difficult, yet extremely important, task.
As for the Stability and Growth Pact, we welcome the fact that one of the Luxembourg Presidency’s priorities is to ensure that multilateral budgetary monitoring will make a greater contribution to a strong, healthy and successful economic and monetary Union. These principles underpin the Stability and Growth Pact and this Pact must be respected and must function properly. Let us not forget that the single currency is one of Europe’s great achievements. I remember before the euro came into force, certain experts, economists and professors, particularly on the other side of the Atlantic, were saying that Europe would never be able to have a strong currency because of its lack of solidarity and political cohesion. Nowadays, some are saying that our currency might be too strong, but not too weak. The single currency is therefore an historic European success story. We must not now jeopardise that great success.
(
)"@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples