Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2010-10-19-Speech-2-305"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20101019.20.2-305"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Mr President, the 2011 EU budget is the first to be prepared under the Lisbon Treaty, but it is not the first in the age of austerity. The global financial crisis has revealed the deep structural weaknesses of the European development model, based on high taxes, high fiscal redistribution, inflexible labour markets and unnecessarily extended welfare provisions. Now it is time to rethink and restructure fiscality, not only at the national level, but also at the European one.
The 2011 EU budget shows some signs of austerity but does not go far enough in structural change. This is related to the fact that many people think that quantity is quality, namely, the bigger the spending, the better its impact on the European economy and society. Moreover, they demand additional funds because the Lisbon Treaty and the Europe 2020 strategy imposed new mandates on the Community.
But there is a fundamental misunderstanding in this concept. The EU budget is small compared to national ones – and rightfully so. It does not need to grow in order to perform its functions. What matters most is the structure of the budget and the effectiveness of spending. Sharp focus on innovation, R&D, higher education, selected areas of energy transport, agriculture and rural development will do. Our budget is completely dissimilar to national budgets, which have very little discretionary spending. We do have a lot of discretion. The EU budget should be regarded as a capital budget, rather than a current one. It should focus only on investments in the common European future.
That is why our group feels strongly that the EU budget does not need to grow. It never substitutes the national budgets representing national sovereignty. There is no need for an EU-wide tax. Taxes at the EU level would not substitute, but inevitably supplement, national taxation, increasing further the tax disadvantages of the European area compared to the rest of the world.
The ECR says no to bond issuance as well. Debt securities imply debt and would open the door to deficits building up debt. We have enough debt at the national level and even more unfunded liabilities. We do not need additional layers of debt which would destroy the future of European youth and make Europe’s terminal decline irreversible. The ECR agrees with the priorities of the 2011 budget as stated by the rapporteur – youth, education and mobility – but, if we take these goals seriously, it logically follows that what our young people need is definitely not a greater fiscal burden in the age of adverse demographics, but more solidarity and investment in our common future."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata | |
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples