Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2010-10-20-Speech-3-087"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20101020.3.3-087"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Mr President, let me start by thanking rapporteurs Berès and Feio and the honourable Members for this very substantial and substantive debate.
Secondly, the Commission wants the financial sector to play a part in covering the costs of the crisis and that is why the EU – and the Commission – are committed to pushing for a financial transaction tax at global level.
Thirdly, the Commission has, in the meantime, tabled as one option for own resources in the EU budget a proposal that the financial sector should make an equitable contribution at EU level, such as a financial activities tax.
This is our view. We have proposed a bank levy or stability fee; we have raised the possibility of a financial activities tax as a source for own resources; and thirdly, we are committed to pushing for a financial transaction tax at the global level.
In the report by Mr Feio, there is a proposal on establishing a European monetary fund. The Commission is in favour of establishing a permanent mechanism for crisis prevention and crisis resolution which must have two sides, two elements, two dimensions. There needs to be an accent on crisis prevention as well as on crisis resolution, because it is better to be safe than sorry.
As regards crisis resolution, we have clearly stated already in May that a robust framework for crisis management for the euro area is necessary, and the Commission intends to make proposals for a permanent crisis resolution mechanism in due time.
A few general principles have emerged, especially that crisis prevention and resolution must go hand in hand and that any financial assistance must be subject to strict conditionality.
Such a permanent mechanism must minimise moral hazard and provide incentives for the Member States to pursue a responsible fiscal policy and incentives for investors to pursue responsible lending practices.
Mr Schmidt proposed an amendment concerning voluntary participation of non-euro area Member States in the sanctions regime. You know that at the first stage, we are proposing a regime for the euro area Member States and, at the second stage, for all 27 Member States. The Commission can accept and endorse this amendment, which aims at involving the non-euro area Member States in the sanctions regime on a voluntary basis.
We have made satisfactory progress in the context of the task force and achieved convergence towards the Commission’s initiatives to reinforce economic governance, notably focusing on prevention and pre-emptive action, putting an emphasis on debt sustainability, agreeing a method to address macro-economic imbalances and establish an effective enforcement mechanism.
Even though there has been a convergence of views towards the Commission’s proposals in the task force, the normal legislative process is only just starting. So far, we have only seen the beginning. We are perhaps at the end of the beginning, but now the real normal legislative process is just starting, and the European Parliament, as the colegislator, has indeed the crucial and decisive role.
I do appreciate that the volume of the contributions corresponds to the importance of the issues discussed. I want to make a few comments, responses and remarks on the debate and reports, and I will begin with the international scene.
We want to work together with you, and we call on the Council and Parliament to deliver the legislative decisions by the summer of next year so that we can have the new system of economic governance in force by next summer, 2011, when we have the next major round of assessment of effective action.
This is really a matter of credibility for the European Union in terms of reinforcing economic governance, and I fully agree with you that it is indeed the Community method that makes the European Union work and deliver.
I listened to you very carefully on this. I appreciate your firm commitment to the Community method, starting with the speeches by Mr Daul, Mr Schulz, Mr Verhofstadt and Mr Cohn-Bendit, although I cannot stretch to such oratory elegance as the ‘Deauville deal’ or the ‘casino compromise’.
Anyway, let us demonstrate together once again that the Community method can deliver, and now it must deliver, the new system of economic governance, and let us thus complement the strong monetary union by a strong and effective economic union to make a real and complete economic and monetary union.
In the world economy, the pre-crisis imbalances are re-emerging, which threatens a sustainable recovery and job creation. It is therefore essential that the G20, first the ministerial meeting this week, and then the summit in two weeks, is able to pursue effective international policy coordination to rebalance global growth.
All countries must play their part in rebalancing: surplus countries by reinforcing domestic demand, and deficit countries by focusing on export growth. This is a matter of millions of jobs in the world economy and in the European Union.
The European Union is working for a strong and stable international financial system in which exchange rates should reflect economic fundamentals. This is an essential element of the G20 goal of rebalancing global growth for the sake of sustainable recovery and job creation.
For the same reasons, it is essential for the EU to reform and reinforce its own economic governance. The reports prepared by Mrs Berès and Mr Feio are important contributions to this effect, and the Commission’s legislative proposals, once adopted, will make a quantum leap towards a true and effectively functioning economic and monetary union.
There were some questions about the Commission’s views on levies and taxes on financial institutions. I discussed this with President Barroso and we thought it would be useful to clarify our position in this regard because there were some confusing statements made concerning this issue.
We are in the midst of a fundamental reform of our own financial system and we need to keep up the momentum at the G20 as well. The Commission has put forward a proposal, first of all, on a stability fee or a bank levy so that the private sector, the banking and financial sector, would and will participate towards the costs caused by the crisis and towards the resolution of future crises.
This is on the table and, in some Member States, this is being implemented."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata | |
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples