Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-12-01-Speech-4-127"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20051201.30.4-127"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
There are some ways in which it is understandable that the new Member States should be so keen to introduce the euro without much delay.
What needs to be borne in mind, though, is the fact that a mere 38% of the public in the 10 new Member States are persuaded that the introduction of the euro would be beneficial in its effects and that nearly half favour its introduction at as late a date as possible.
It is this latter choice that we should accept, since it does offer the countries concerned the opportunity to carry out the necessary reforms at a more leisurely pace and allows the people more time in which to get used to the idea of the position changing.
It is also a fact – and this is not the least of the considerations to be borne in mind – that past experience, whatever the attempts to deny it, shows that the introduction of the euro leads to increased prices, since companies endeavour to recover the costs they have incurred in the course of the changeover.
The Commission should demonstrate that it has learned from the failure of the EU’s constitution by supporting referenda to discern the popular will – such as the one planned for Poland – rather than arguing against it by claiming that Poland is obliged to introduce the euro. When such states as the United Kingdom, Denmark and Sweden retain their monetary independence, we should allow others to do likewise."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples