Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2007-06-20-Speech-3-148"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20070620.17.3-148"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
We abstained from the vote on account of the fact that it is entirely up to each Member State to make the sovereign decision on whether or not it wants to join the Eurozone. Our opposition to the creation of Economic and Monetary Union and to the Eurozone is well known. The example of Portugal has amply demonstrated how the euro is a tool for promoting wage moderation and flexibility in the labour market. By sustaining nominal and not real convergence, it has been to the detriment of growth, employment and living standards, and to the benefit of the large European multinationals and financial groups.
I wish to point out that the issue of speeding up the enlargement of the Eurozone is also based on the political criteria of strengthening both political integration and the Eurozone itself. With two new Member States – Malta and Cyprus – the Eurozone will boast over half of EU Member States. This is a significant psychological barrier, when dissatisfaction among the workers and the people as a whole in the Eurozone is on the increase and when the future Constitutional Treaty is under discussion. The majority therefore accept the idea of joining, even though Malta does not fulfil all the nominal convergence criteria. As in the past, this is not an ‘economic’ decision, but a political one."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples