Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-05-31-Speech-3-202"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2006-05-31"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Enlargement of the euro zone (debate)2
dcterms:Language	"pl"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20060531.18.3-202"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2006-05-31-Speech-3-2032
lpv:speaker	lp:Zbigniew Kuźmiuk2
lpv:spokenAs	unknown; Polskie Stronnictwo Ludowe (2004-07-20--2009-07-13)3 substitute; ECON (2006-01-05--2007-01-14)3 member; Delegation to the EU-Bulgaria Joint Parliamentary Committee (2004-09-15--2006-12-31)3 member; BUDG (2004-07-21--2007-01-14)3 member; UEN (2005-12-13--2009-07-13)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, in taking the floor in this debate I would like to draw attention to the following issues. Firstly, the report quite clearly states that new Member States must meet all the Maastricht criteria before they can join the euro zone. At the same time it passes over the fact that when the euro was introduced, many old Member States did not meet these criteria. Once again the political signal being sent out is that some are more equal than others in the EU. Secondly, since the introduction of the euro in 2002, at least five countries, including the largest – Germany, France and Italy – have not complied with the most important criteria, and have been unable to keep their budget deficits and public debt under control. In some of these countries, public debt greatly exceeds 60% of GDP, which means they will have to restrict it for many years to come. Despite this the continued membership of these countries in the monetary and currency union not only continues unquestioned, but nobody is making any particular effort to force these countries to change the current state of affairs. The recent amendments to the Stability and Growth Pact which benefited Germany and France are glaring examples of this. Thirdly, and in view of this situation, the rejection of Lithuania’s application to join the euro zone as of 1 January 2007, merely because it exceeded the inflation indicator by 0.1%, may at the very least cause confusion and bodes no good for the debate on enlargement of the euro zone to include all the new Member States, or on the accession to this zone of the United Kingdom, Denmark or Sweden."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph