Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2010-11-24-Speech-3-084"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20101124.7.3-084"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, honourable Members, the Presidency of the Council and the European Parliament already had the opportunity to discuss the G20 on 20 October 2010; at the time we were on the eve of the ministerial meeting of the G20 and were waiting to see how things would develop in Seoul.
Taking note of what has happened in recent weeks regarding the so-called currency war, I think the European Union has done a good job and has been able to defend a balanced position, which means that exchange rates should reflect the economic fundamentals and that we do not need to have recourse to competitive devaluation.
Finally, since Seoul, France has assumed responsibility for the Presidency of the G20 and I think this is a unique opportunity for Europeans and the European Union as such. It will be very important for us to work together in a coordinated way so as to make sure that throughout the coming year – and with a view to the Cannes G20 summit in November 2011 and beyond that – the G20 will be commensurate with the expectations it has created.
The real challenge that lies before us is to show that a forum created in order to deal with the crisis is also able to provide the contribution and incentive needed to achieve medium-term objectives, such as stronger, more sustained and more balanced global growth; clear, fair rules for the international financial market; and international organisations that are more representative of the world today and which are more capable of helping national governments and European institutions to deal with globalisation. Mr President, I believe it is up to the G20 to show in the coming years that the globalisation process is not only economic but also, indeed primarily, political.
As Europeans, we were well prepared for these meetings, both at ministerial level and at the level of Heads of State or Government. We realised that the lack of cohesion among Europeans would rapidly lead us to exhaust the European Union’s credibility on the international stage. It has to be said that the Seoul Summit received mixed reactions from around the world. For my part, I believe that we should continue to be optimistic despite everything, even if the results were not as impressive as we would have hoped.
Before the Seoul Summit, we were convinced that the toughest and most important test was going to be maintaining our momentum. We should not make the mistake of thinking that we no longer need global cooperation, with the excuse that we are no longer in the critical situation we were in 18 months ago, or even six months ago. We still believe that political leaders are responsible for making decisions. They are, and that is indeed the essence of politics. However, I think they also have another, even more important responsibility: making sure that decisions do not remain on paper, but have concrete results and are fully implemented.
The Seoul Summit showed that the real challenge for the G20, and therefore for all of us, is understanding how we should continue with and indeed accelerate implementation. We have to turn good intentions into practical results, and all of that is important for at least two reasons. First of all, the markets are not satisfied with statements alone. They are observing the developments that take place two days, ten days and thirty days after the summit, once the media have gone home. The state of the European economy needs to be understood as a whole; it is not merely the result of progress made during the two-day summit. The progress we are aiming for can only be made through continuous, daily work and, as Members of the European Parliament, you know this better than anyone.
The second reason is just as important as the first, and concerns you all directly. I think that Parliament and the national parliaments can carry out the task of scrutinising, but also of providing political incentives for the European and international economic agenda, making sure that we have proper implementation between one summit and the next and that the G20 increasingly becomes a process rather than merely a series of meetings.
In terms of substance, the Union’s contribution to strong, lasting, balanced growth is now clear, and is based on a certain number of principles: fiscal consolidation plans aimed at sustainable, differentiated growth; the Europe 2020 strategy for the structural reforms needed in order to sustain job creation in particular; the programme of reforms to the financial sector and markets, and, finally, the strengthening of economic governance in the EU. I would add that the Union is very interested in the peer review process in the context of the G20. As Europeans, we are used to this and we know how useful that type of exercise can be. Clearly, everyone has to pull their weight and show renewed will to make a contribution to action for growth.
Once again, and in the spirit of my earlier comments, I would like to say that the battle against protectionism cannot be won outright, but only by maintaining the necessary level of global alert on a daily basis.
Otherwise, I should like to highlight three important developments in the past month. The first one is the reform of the International Monetary Fund (IMF), for the EU clearly showed that it was prepared to do its share so that the new IMF could be more representative of the new international economic reality and, therefore, so that the emerging economies could make their voice heard and play a greater role. We agreed to reduce our presence in the IMF’s executive committee and we made considerable concessions in terms of shares. I think we have kept what was dearest to our heart and that the international community as a whole has benefited.
The second development concerns the Basel III agreement. I think that, with regard to banks’ capital requirements, we are going in the right direction and it is, of course, vital that all Member States concerned should maintain their commitment to implement Basel III. Obviously this question of implementation will remain on the political agenda of both the EU and the G20."@en1
|
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples