Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-09-06-Speech-2-190"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2005-09-06"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:European Union general budget for 20062
dcterms:Language	"hu"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20050906.31.2-190"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2005-09-06-Speech-2-1912
lpv:speaker	lp:István Szent-iványi2
lpv:spokenAs	unknown; Szabad Demokraták Szövetsége (2004-07-20--2009-07-13)3 substitute; INTA (2004-07-22--2007-01-14)3 substitute; Delegation to the EU-Romania Joint Parliamentary Committee (2004-09-15--2006-12-31)3 member_of_the_bureau; ALDE (2004-12-06--2009-07-13)3 member; AFET (2004-07-21--2007-01-14)3 vice-chair; Delegation for relations with the Korean Peninsula (2004-09-21--2007-03-13)3
lpv:translated text	". The Council wants to reduce the budget of the European Union by half a billion euros compared to the Commission’s proposal. This is in itself unacceptable, but what is particularly unacceptable is the fact that more than one third of these cuts relate to external relations and external affairs. The proposed reduction in expenditures on external affairs is ten times greater than in any other area. The successes and achievements of the European Union to date have been related in no small measure to external relations. We are proud of enlargement, and of our aid policy; we are proud of the fact that we are the world’s biggest donor. These priorities are nevertheless absent from the draft, and most conspicuously so from the Council proposals. Indeed, not only are they absent; the reductions would affect these programmes most of all. Yet I believe that today we very much need to be able to demonstrate successes. Europe, the European Union is crying out for such successes. However, there is also another problem. We are failing to take our own principles seriously; we have failed to do so up to now, and we are failing to do so in this draft. The Council has virtually never invoked the human rights clause. We support a multitude of countries that make a mockery of democracy and human rights. And yet we have a tool at our disposal to do something, since the human rights clause provides the possibility of withdrawing support from countries that fail to observe human rights and the rule of law and it also allows us to increase the support we give to countries that observe these rules. One example would be the countries of the western Balkans. You, on the other hand, propose making even greater reductions in the support we provide to the western Balkan countries than in overall spending on foreign affairs. And yet it is in our fundamental interest to stabilise the western Balkan region. It is incomprehensible that the Council should want to give 5% less to this region, and 8% less to Serbia, for example, than in the previous year. At the same time, it is very generous as regards European special envoys, whose budget has been set to double over two years. In other words, there is to be an increase in something that is of questionable necessity, while at the same time there are to be reductions affecting things that we vitally need."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph