Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-06-07-Speech-2-232"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2005-06-07"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Policy challenges and budgetary means2
dcterms:Language	"sv"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20050607.25.2-232"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2005-06-07-Speech-2-2332
lpv:speaker	lp:Gunnar Hökmark2
lpv:spokenAs	member_of_the_bureau; EPP-ED (2004-08-31--2007-02-14)3 member; Delegation to the EU-Turkey Joint Parliamentary Committee (2004-09-15--2009-07-13)3 substitute; ITRE (2004-07-22--2007-01-14)3 substitute; Delegation for relations with Israel (2004-09-15--2007-03-13)3 unknown; Moderata Samlingspartiet (2004-07-20--2009-07-13)3 substitute; Temporary committee on policy challenges and budgetary means of the enlarged Union 2007-2013 (2004-10-14--2005-06-08)3 member; ECON (2004-07-21--2007-01-14)3
lpv:translated text	"Madam President, what we are concerned with here is prioritising EU expenditure. It is necessary to be able not only to prioritise what is important but also to give lower priority to what is less important. In setting priorities, we must also be able to distinguish between the common, and most important, tasks of the EU and the important tasks of the Member States. We have not reached the point of doing that in this work on the financial perspectives. If the Commission’s proposal had been implemented, it would have meant an increase of almost a third in the Swedish membership contribution. It would have reduced the scope for the investments in growth and new jobs that must be made in Sweden, and it would have created major budget problems. If we want Europe to become the world’s most competitive knowledge-based economy, it does not make sense for us to give priority to the rich Member States’ contributions at the expense of developing a common infrastructure in our weakest regions. Not enough priority has yet been given to this area. Nor is it sensible of us to give priority to marketing efforts in the developing countries on behalf of European agriculture, at the same time as reducing our most important investments in Europe’s knowledge and research community. If, in your negotiations, you – the Council and the Commission – do not manage to ensure that we are able to achieve the objective of devoting 3% of the European economy to aiding knowledge and research so that European research can take the lead in Europe’s knowledge-based society, then you will fail in setting one of the most important priorities needed by Europe. The rapporteur has done a fantastic job, involving clear priorities. The Commission did not, and the Council now appears to be reducing the investment that should be made in research. I urge it not to do this. Europe needs aid for research."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph