Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2008-07-09-Speech-3-236"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20080709.27.3-236"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Sovereign wealth funds, these state-owned funds that are invested all over the world, are they a good or a bad thing? Rather a good thing, if we are to believe this resolution. However, it is true that a Europe that is stagnating economically on account of its own economic and monetary policies cannot afford to dismiss the thousands of billions of euros of potential investment that they represent.
It is true that, for the time being, sovereign wealth funds do not disturb the financial markets (they have even come to the aid of the US banking system) and would tend to be directed more towards long-term investment. However, that may change. We are all aware of the opacity of most of these funds with regard to the scale of their resources, the distribution of their assets, their governing structures and their investment strategies that range from ethical investment to the pursuit of high yields, positions of control and perhaps the potential to cause serious damage in the future. The states that hold these funds are not all friends of Europe, far from it. One of them has already evoked the threat of its ‘financial nuclear weapon’.
However, we shall abstain on this text instead of voting against it because, although it supports the free movement of capital worldwide, it cautiously calls for some monitoring of and protection against these funds."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples