Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2010-10-19-Speech-2-319"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2010-10-19"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Parliament's position on the 2011 draft budget as modified by the Council - all sections - Draft amending budget No 3/2010: Section III - Commission - BAM (Banana Accompanying Measures) (debate)2
dcterms:Language	"en"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20101019.20.2-319"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2010-10-19-Speech-2-3212
lpv:speaker	lp:James Elles2
lpv:spoken text	"Madam President, congratulations to the rapporteurs in what are very trying and difficult financial circumstances, as we have heard in the debate this afternoon. At a time when the British Government is proposing the most wide-ranging budget cuts in a generation we, as Conservatives, have been calling for a freeze on European spending. We believe that the European Union budget must be used to add genuine value in areas such as securing economic growth now, and recovery in the future, stability in the EU and around the world, reducing global poverty and fighting the shared challenge of climate change. Furthermore, we have tabled amendments to the budget resolution where we want clarification in three specific areas: on the costs, for example, of Parliament’s external offices in the Member States; disquiet about non-governmental organisations’ funding, on which we would like a report from the European Commission; and last, but not least, the generous pension arrangements in the Staff Regulations, including those for retiring Commissioners. These are issues on which we want clarification in the months ahead. With regard to the broader view, we have had a press release from the European Commission this afternoon. Firstly, we believe that this is not an opportune moment to think about additional own resources in the midst of the worst financial crisis in the last 70 years. Second, Mr Commissioner, while saying ‘yes’, we need more flexibility, and ‘yes’, we want to have more emphasis on the results and the inputs, how is that compatible with calling for a 10-year financial perspective when we see the results of a mid-term review are entirely fruitless in this kind of exercise that we are going through? We cannot set figures in stone ten years ahead when we do not even know what the European economy is going to look like in two years. Lastly, as far as my country is concerned, our net contribution is rising by 60% in the next two years, but we have had no concomitant change in the CAP. Why should it be any different this year? We should be calling for a net cap on our contribution until we have a fair system for the EU budget."@en1
lpv:spokenAs	unknown; Conservative Party (2009-07-14--2014-06-30)3 substitute; Delegation for relations with the United States (2009-09-16--2014-06-30)3 member; BUDG (2009-07-16--2012-01-18)3 substitute; AFET (2010-06-24--2012-01-18)3 substitute; Special committee on the policy challenges and budgetary resources for a sustainable European Union after 2013 (2010-06-23--2011-06-30)3 member; Delegation to the EU-Turkey Joint Parliamentary Committee (2009-09-16--2014-06-30)3 substitute; Delegation for relations with the Arab Peninsula (2009-09-16--2012-01-31)3 member; PECH (2009-07-14--2014-06-30)3
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata	"James Elles (ECR )."1
lpv:videoURI	<go to Events_and_structure europarl>2

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph