Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2010-10-20-Speech-3-049"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2010-10-20"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Preparations for the European Council meeting (28-29 October) - Preparations for the G20 summit (11-12 November) - Financial, economic and social crisis: recommendations concerning the measures and initiatives to be taken - Improving economic governance and stability framework in the EU, in particular, in the euro zone (debate)2
dcterms:Language	"de"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20101020.3.3-049"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2010-10-20-Speech-3-0502
lpv:speaker	lp:Udo Bullmann2
lpv:spokenAs	member; Special Committee on the Financial, Economic and Social Crisis (2009-10-08--2011-07-31)3 substitute; Delegation for relations with the Maghreb countries and the Arab Maghreb Union (2009-09-16--2012-07-03)3 member; Delegation to the ACP-EU Joint Parliamentary Assembly (2009-09-16--2014-06-30)3 member; S&D (2009-07-14--2014-06-30)3 member; ECON (2009-07-16--2012-01-18)3 unknown; Sozialdemokratische Partei Deutschlands (2009-07-14--2014-06-30)3 substitute; EMPL (2009-07-16--2012-01-18)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, Mr Chastel, Commissioner, this could actually have been a time of great answers, but in hindsight, it does not look like it. What is on the table for the so-called reform of the Stability and Growth Pact is no great answer; once again, it is the lowest common denominator – the small morsel that could actually be agreed upon. I congratulate the Commission. You are still at the table – the Member States are not quite going it alone. I also congratulate the Council. Success has been achieved, France and Germany have an agreement – we do not know whether it is a good one or a bad one, but at least they are no longer stuck in the quagmire. What does all this mean? It means that next year, if the growth figures collapse again, we will stand up in front of everyone and have no answer to the economic situation. Where is the section, the legal statute, in which you propose how we can together learn to drag ourselves out of the debt crisis? That is where my group feels there is a gap and that is the debate that we are going to have in this House. Yes, we agree with those Members who want greater commitment to reform. That is something that we want too. However, we then need to discuss the substance. If you are not prepared to provide a more solid foundation for the actual orientation of our budgetary policy, then we can see no reason to continue discussing EU 2020. It is already a paper tiger – we can throw it in the waste paper basket today if you will not debate the substance of it with us more forcefully. We want to make a difference. Yes, it makes a difference whether we invest in limping bureaucracy or in the energy sources and jobs of the future. Where is the point in your proposals where we can make this difference? That is what we are waiting for. This debate has yet to take place. That will be the decisive thing for us. Moreover, we will not accept a catalogue of indicators that is based on the legislation. This Parliament will not have the wool pulled over its eyes. We want to debate whether employment and unemployment are an important feature of budgetary development or not, and we want to do so before the legislation is passed."@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