Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2010-10-19-Speech-2-276"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20101019.20.2-276"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"I would like to say a big thank you to the rapporteur, Mrs Jędrzejewska. She has done an excellent job and, in the main, we are, in fact, in agreement in the Committee on Budgets, even though there are some areas – and I will come back to this – where we in the Group of the Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats in the European Parliament have a slightly different view.
We are well aware of the crisis situation in the Member States’ finances. In spite of this, we essentially defend the EU’s budget, even though we are now keeping to very low levels, particularly when it comes to new policy commitments for next year, where Parliament, too, is keeping its increase below a rate of 1%. This is very modest.
As regards payments, the rate of increase is higher and that is also reasonable. To now try to keep back structural fund payments would directly affect those countries with the greatest problems in terms of jobs and growth. We need to remember that countries such as Greece, Ireland, Portugal, Spain and Latvia are all net receivers of the EU’s budgetary resources. Cutting the budget will not benefit them. We must not forget that.
Firstly, then, we are being restrained. Viewed over the last 20 years, the EU’s budget has actually increased more slowly than those of the Member States. That is something that we should not forget either.
Secondly, we Social Democrats do not accept the view that austerity measures are the only way to deal with the crisis. We are therefore fighting for an increase, especially in category 1a, which includes investments, research and development and labour market initiatives. There must be an increase here. However, we are not in complete agreement with the Council and the Commission with regard to the ITER project. We are in favour of this project, but it must not be the only priority when it comes to research and development. It must not be allowed to supersede everything else. Therefore, if we are to proceed with ITER, we will need to carry out reviews and more money will be needed.
Thirdly, and just as importantly, we need to maintain solidarity during this crisis. If the hardest hit by cuts in the structural funds are those who really need support, then the policy is unacceptable.
Fourthly, we also believe that a certain increase is justified on account of the Treaty of Lisbon. The EU will have a number of new tasks in relation to the External Action Service, new financial institutions, energy and the climate. We cannot assign new tasks to the EU and then not pay for them.
Finally, I would like to mention the foreign policy budget, which is clearly underfunded. If we are to be able to afford to provide aid to Palestine and find the necessary funds for enlargement, we need more money. Therefore, it was also important to us Social Democrats to tie in the 2011 budget with a debate that has a more long-term perspective: about own resources, the budget ceilings for 2012 and 2013, and the financing of the new financial support mechanism. In order to achieve this, I welcome the Commissioner’s mention of flexibility as a possible solution. I am absolutely certain that we will not succeed in these budget negotiations if we cannot in some way either review the budget ceilings or utilise the flexibility instrument. I believe that this is absolutely necessary."@en1
|
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples