Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-04-05-Speech-3-015"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2006-04-05"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:State of progress of negotiations on the Financial Perspective. (debate)2
dcterms:Language	"fr"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20060405.3.3-015"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2006-04-05-Speech-3-0162
lpv:speaker	lp:Francis Wurtz2
lpv:spokenAs	member; Conference of Presidents (2004-07-20--2006-12-12)3 member; AFET (2004-07-21--2007-01-14)3 substitute; Delegation to the Euro-Mediterranean Parliamentary Assembly (2004-09-15--2009-07-13)3 member; Delegation to the ACP-EU Joint Parliamentary Assembly (2004-09-15--2007-03-14)3 substitute; BUDG (2004-07-21--2007-01-14)3 chair; EUL/NGL (2004-07-20--2009-07-13)3 unknown; Parti communiste français (2004-07-20--2009-07-13)3 substitute; Delegation for relations with the United States (2004-09-15--2007-03-13)3
lpv:translated text	". Mr President, Mr Schüssel, Mr Barroso, my group has never advocated a thoughtless increase of the budget. What is more, we do not believe that the budget is the only instrument available to the Union when it comes to facilitating healthy growth and balanced development. Thus, it would undoubtedly be very helpful if the European Central Bank were to play a different role in this regard. Nevertheless, the budget is always the expression of a political desire. There is no point in us harbouring lofty ambitions if we reject the financial resources needed to fulfil them. That is particularly true in the case of enlargement, which everyone knew, even before the start of the process, would entail legitimate costs, particularly in the context of the Structural Funds and the Cohesion Fund. That is why even Parliament’s original demands and the Böge report seemed to us to fall a long way short of the financial needs corresponding to the commitments made. We therefore agreed with Parliament’s decision to reject the European Council’s cut-price compromise of last December. You were right, Mr Barroso, to point out at the time the drastic cuts that a financial perspective such as this would entail and to call for resources for education, research, the trans-European networks, cooperation and so on. From the point of view of these objectives, the 1.5% increase demanded by our negotiators was in itself extremely modest: 1.5% of 1.04% of the Union’s gross national income. As far as the Council was concerned, however, that was still three times too much. Under these circumstances, my group takes the view that our credibility depends on our rejecting this farce and that, consequently, we must shoulder our responsibilities."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph