Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-05-17-Speech-3-039"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20060517.3.3-039"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, the final agreement on the financial perspective for 2007-2013 coincided with the second anniversary of the enlargement of the European Union, and thus constitutes a birthday present of sorts. It is also real proof that the European Union is functioning with 25 Member States. This is proof in a field where compromise is difficult, as differences are sharply delineated and calculable in financial terms.
The financial agreement and the agreement on financial principles leave us here in Parliament in doubt as to whether we have sufficient funds to achieve the stated political aims of the European Union. This uncertainty almost verges on the certain knowledge that, in line with the agreement, some limits must be revised upwards in the course of the coming seven years, especially in order to fulfil the European Union’s ambitions on the international stage. It is good, however, that the flexibility and capacity of the budget to react have been increased, that we have increased access to European Investment Bank loans and that certain funds, such as the Solidarity Fund, the Globalisation Fund and the Emergency Aid Reserve, have been placed outside the scope of the financial perspective.
The lesson we can learn from this experience is that there should not be such marked differences between the initial positions of the European Commission, Parliament and the Council, as such enormous differences, which amount to billions of euros, can mean that some figures become abstract notions, especially if spending cuts are subsequently sought where the budget was to have been modified. The Rural Development Fund is an example and symbol of just such a case.
The budget needs changes, but it does not require a revolution. It cannot be an alternative means of reforming the European Union. Public spending cannot replace the far-reaching reforms needed to make the Union competitive.
I would like to thank all those who took part in this venture, which has now been brought to a successful close."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples