Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-02-16-Speech-4-175"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20060216.20.4-175"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, I consider the report being debated today in Parliament, drawn up by the rapporteur, Mr Hamon, and discussed by the members of the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs, to be very timely, since the International Monetary Fund is in the midst of debating its strategic review on the basis of the document presented by its Executive Director.
In the field of development aid and the eradication of poverty, the Monetary Fund, together with the World Bank and the European Union, are undoubtedly the main world players and, in this case, there is also close and productive cooperation between the different institutions.
All of these aspects are taken up in one way or another in the report that we are debating today, and the Commission is very happy to express its agreement with the positions expressed by the rapporteur and supported by the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs.
The report also stresses the need to distribute the quotas and voting rights within the Fund’s governing institutions in a manner that reflects the relative weight of the different economies of the member countries in a more balanced manner. This will give the least-developed countries and, in particular, the African countries, a greater voice, since their current quota of representation and capital in the Fund is very low.
As the Monetary Fund points out in its documents, carrying out this reform of the distribution of quotas and voting rights is the responsibility of the shareholder countries and requires significant political will. It has to be appreciated that to increase some people’s quotas at the expense of others may benefit everybody in the medium and long term because it will allow the Fund to carry out its duties more effectively and fulfil the objectives set for it.
My final point, Mr President, relates to the external representation of the eurozone and of the European Union in economic and monetary matters. I would like to thank the rapporteur and all of the honourable Members who have included this point in the report that we are debating today, though I would like to point out — as I believe I said in this same Chamber last year — that the Commission would prefer a clearer and more direct formulation of the objective of a more appropriate external representation of the eurozone and of the European Union as a whole, such as that proposed in Amendment 5, presented by Mr Purvis, for example.
Together with the Presidency of the Eurogroup, the Commission has begun reflecting on how to move towards this more effective external representation of the eurozone and, eventually, of the European Union. Through will and realism, we are trying gradually to draw up a consistent approach that will enable us to make progress towards better coordination amongst the members of the eurozone when it comes to expressing a position in international financial institutions. In the short term, the intention is to identify items in the programmes of these institutions with regard to which the Member States can achieve a coordinated position, such as in the field of budgetary monitoring, for example. In the long term, the objective is still to achieve a single representation for the eurozone in the Fund, which will allow it to exert an influence equivalent to the economic weight of the Monetary Union. To this end, the strong political support of the Member States will undoubtedly be required.
The Commission believes that Parliament can and must make a significant contribution to giving form to this aspiration, expressing its opinion in this regard as clearly as possible.
I shall end, Mr President, by saying that the Commission is prepared to study how Parliament can participate in the formulation of the positions that the representatives of the eurozone and of the European Union are required to express in international financial bodies and institutions. This issue must be examined. It is not easy to find a way, but, in any event, I can assure all of the honourable Members that the Commission and myself are fully prepared to go further into this issue whenever you see fit.
As you know, the Commission does not have any direct or formal presence in the International Monetary Fund, and nor does the European Union. It is the Member States that are represented. But we must bear in mind that the Member States represented in the European Union and this House account for more than 30% of the shareholders in the International Monetary Fund.
This contribution to the debate therefore seems to me to be extremely useful, in terms of how to ensure greater economic and financial stability in the global economy, with the development of the least developed countries and the eradication of poverty included within this notion of stability.
In order to achieve these objectives, there is no doubt that the assistance of the institutions with the capacity for global action, such as the International Monetary Fund, is needed.
The first thing that strikes us when we analyse the role of the Monetary Fund in the world economy at the beginning of the 21st century is that the objectives set for it when it was created in 1944 are still relevant today.
Nevertheless, while the objectives of promoting international monetary stability — those of facilitating the expansion of international trade, promoting exchange stability and lessening the degree of disequilibrium in balances of payments — are still entirely appropriate, the economic context within which the Fund is operating today is radically different to the context of sixty years ago.
This fact is recognised by the Fund in its strategic review, of course, in which it states that the challenge of globalisation is central to the work entrusted to that institution. The Fund’s new approach is therefore to look at its essential tasks of monitoring and lending within the context of globalisation.
To this end, the Fund takes account of both the risks and the opportunities. For example, in its strategic document, it acknowledges that the free movement of capital allows for a more efficient allocation of resources, but at the same time it also points out that it leads to greater volatility and greater risk of extreme reactions by the markets in the event of crisis. It also notes the impetus provided by the emerging economies, which are making a great contribution to the high levels of growth in the world economy, but also notes that the power of these emerging economies is making it more difficult for the poorest countries to jump on the bandwagon of world trade and world growth.
The Commission shares the view of globalisation expressed by the Fund in its strategic document; we communicate our views to the International Monetary Fund during the fluid and frequent contacts that we hold with that institution. In particular, as you know, we cooperate with the Monetary Fund in defining our policies and adopting our decisions on the macrofinancial assistance that the European Community gives to countries of the Western Balkans or some of the States that were formerly part of the Soviet Union. Macrofinancial assistance, based on the resources of the Community budget, is always linked to a series of conditions that are complementary to the Fund’s interventions in those same countries."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples