Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2009-12-15-Speech-2-024"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2009-12-15"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Draft general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2010 as modified by the Council (all sections) - Draft amending budget No 10/2009 of the European Union for the financial year 2009, Section III – Commission - Mobilisation of the Flexibility Instrument - Amendment to the multiannual financial framework 2007-2013: financing energy projects under the European Economic Recovery Plan (debate)2
dcterms:Language	"pt"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20091215.7.2-024"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2009-12-15-Speech-2-0252
lpv:speaker	lp:Miguel Portas2
lpv:spokenAs	member_of_the_bureau; EUL/NGL (2009-07-14--2012-01-22)3 member; Delegation for relations with the Maghreb countries and the Arab Maghreb Union (2009-09-16--2012-04-24)3 substitute; Delegation for relations with Iran (2009-09-16--2012-04-24)3 vice-chair; Special Committee on the Financial, Economic and Social Crisis (2009-10-15--2011-07-31)3 substitute; Delegation for relations with the Mashreq countries (2009-09-16--2012-04-24)3 substitute; ECON (2009-07-16--2012-01-18)3 unknown; Bloco de Esquerda (2009-07-14--2012-04-24)3 member; BUDG (2009-07-16--2012-01-18)3 member; Delegation for relations with Iraq (2009-09-16--2012-04-24)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, I think we are in danger of not seeing the wood for the trees with this budget. The question I put to you, quite frankly, is this: if there were no crisis, would this budget be very different from what it is? We all know it would not. That is the crucial issue. That, in fact, is why the report on which we are going to vote on Thursday recognises that the Council is not prepared to increase the funds available to tackle the crisis, is reducing the appropriations for the Structural and Cohesion Funds precisely when the crisis is happening and is severe, and, I repeat, does not give climate change the prominence it deserves. The report itself adds further criticisms, like those made by Mrs Haug. For example, there is an enormous disparity between the level of spending authorised and the payments made; spending remains below the planned limits; and we basically do not even know whether what is spent is spent well. In view of such a damning assessment, how can this House approve such a budget? There is only one explanation: Parliament is the weak link in the budgetary authority. Even children know that he who pays the piper calls the tune, and it is the Member States who pay. Ladies and gentlemen, today we are also talking about the future, because within a year, Europeans will be confronting the greatest budgetary adjustment programme in living memory in each of our Member States. It is quite simple for the ordinary citizen: when one crisis ends, another begins, this time ostensibly to restructure public accounts. This policy is irresponsible and, in the meantime, it keeps the zero deficit in the European budget. The difficulties cannot continue to be borne by the same people as ever: the unemployed, casual workers and pensioners, through cuts in their pensions. The Union will only stop being part of the problem when it starts sending the bills to the right addresses. Without closing offshore tax havens, without taxing financial transactions and without issuing bonds, we will never be able to attack the crisis with the only response that can really put an end to it: social justice. You can therefore count on the left for a robust, radical and redistributive revision of the financial perspective until 2016, but do not count on the left to tart up a mediocre budget that neither addresses the social crisis nor shows the ambition needed to fight climate change."@en1
lpv:videoURI	<go to Events_and_structure europarl>2

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph