Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-06-22-Speech-3-094"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20050622.13.3-094"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Mr President, I would like to join those who have congratulated the President-in-Office of the European Council, Mr Juncker, for the real efforts that he made to try and reach a decision on these very difficult and complex issues at the European Council last week.
In retrospect we realise that Mr Schulz was right that we in the Parliament had done our work, the Commission had done its work, but the Council, for reasons of overcharge on its agenda, had not actually done the real thinking on the financial perspective. Therefore, to have completed a deal within the space of two weeks was perhaps a little bit beyond the capacity of the Union. No deal is better than a bad deal.
Now we need to look forward and there are four points I will raise quickly. The first is to have a real debate about priorities of the Union. How can you have a financial perspective unless you know what the policy priorities are going to be? Part of that must be the economic reform agenda.
Mr Watson referred to the UK and France being in Jurassic Park. I think the economies of France and Germany are the dinosaurs in Jurassic Park. We have to make sure that there is an economic dynamism that shows we can be competitive in the global economy.
Second, we need to be able to fix a budget deal. Not, as Mr Barroso said, to have a seven year deal with a review. Let us come back to what we said in the Berger resolution and have a five-year deal, allowing the Commission and Parliament to review it in 2011. This way we can see how far we are going without having to predict what our expenditure will be too far into the future. In reconsidering that option we need to do more, as Mr Virrankoski said, on co-financing on agriculture.
Third – and I include two last points here – we need to look at the question of the Constitutional Treaty. I welcome the suspension of ratification, because there are many things that are needed in terms of transparency, accountability, democracy and inclusion of national parliaments. This will be essential for a Union of the future.
Last, but not least, is the question of enlargement. Mr President-in-Office, what you do not do when you are putting a house in order is put up a new annex and then try to make sure you are still expanding. Let us, as Mr Nassauer said, focus on what is really essential for our European citizens and then think about enlargement, if necessary, a little bit further on."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples