Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-03-09-Speech-3-183"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2005-03-09"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Preparation of the European Council (Brussels, 22-23 March 2005)2
dcterms:Language	"de"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20050309.15.3-183"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2005-03-09-Speech-3-1842
lpv:speaker	lp:Armin Laschet2
lpv:spokenAs	member_of_the_bureau; EPP-ED (2004-11-14--2005-06-29)3 substitute; Delegation for relations with the NATO Parliamentary Assembly (2004-09-15--2005-06-29)3 unknown; Christlich Demokratische Union Deutschlands (2004-07-20--2005-06-29)3 member; AFET (2004-07-21--2005-06-29)3 substitute; BUDG (2004-07-22--2005-06-29)3 member; Delegation to the EU-Armenia, EU-Azerbaijan and EU-Georgia Parliamentary Cooperation Committees (2004-09-15--2005-06-29)3 substitute; SEDE (2004-08-31--2005-06-29)3 substitute; Delegation to the EU-Russia Parliamentary Cooperation Committee (2004-09-15--2005-06-29)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, Mr President-in-Office of the Council, any German in this House will find it particularly difficult to talk about the forthcoming Council and the Stability and Growth Pact, for you know how hard the Germans found it to abandon the Deutschmark. The only way in which the German public could be persuaded to part with the Deutschmark was with the explicit promise that there would be a Stability and Growth Pact that would draw on the tradition of the Deutschmark and maintain the currency’s long-term stability. Of course, it is particularly problematic when, out of all the Member States, it is the larger ones, such as Germany and France, who, having compelled the smaller countries – including those in southern Europe – to accept this Pact, themselves breach it, breaking its rules and even altering it when they get into difficulties. For that reason, I can only encourage the Luxembourg presidency to stick to its guns at the summit, and urge all the other members of the Council to do likewise. Altering the Pact is certainly worth thinking about; here in this House, we have heard important arguments as to why it can be applied in different ways at certain stages. The worst option, though, is to alter the Pact precisely when one has oneself broken the rules and got away scot-free, and so the sixteen-point list that Mr Juncker has put forward is the right way to go about reforming it. Our position on this issue is that the Commission’s hand must be strengthened, and it must continue to be a player. It cannot be for the Member States to decide when and where this or that special rule should apply where the Stability Pact is concerned. What the European Council should bear in mind, when coming to its conclusions on 22 and 23 March, is that the Commission must be put in a stronger position, and that there are several changes we can talk about. As this Council is meeting in a special international situation, let me add the final comment that, in the Middle East, among our Mediterranean neighbours, a lot of things are in a state of flux. There too, it is important that we should be alongside the democrats and supporting human rights. For that reason, I would like to see this Council – in contrast to what we in this House have heard from it so far – send, by the way it votes, a clear message concerning the activities of terrorists, of Hezbollah, and everything associated with them."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph