Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2011-02-15-Speech-2-414-000"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20110215.25.2-414-000"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, Mr Barroso, ladies and gentlemen, we are fully aware that we need a provision in the Treaty in order to bring about legal certainty. In my country, this is regarded as a constitutional necessity and this is why we are discussing the need for a modification to the Treaty so that we can guarantee the stability of the euro in the long term.
There are many other possibilities involving more wide-ranging modifications to the Treaty which would incorporate this fully into community policy. Alternatively, we could use different wording at another point within the relevant article. On the other hand, there is then, of course, the risk that the simplified procedure could no longer be applied, which would result in referendums being needed. As a result, we would not be able to reach a decision in time, which would cause problems that would affect the financial markets.
However, it is important to explain that the monetary union is a community power. We must ensure that this power is not undermined either by the stability mechanism or the competitiveness pact.
The Treaty has deficiencies which can, unfortunately, only be resolved by taking an intergovernmental approach, because of the circumstances that have already been described. However, there are examples of Member States agreeing on joint regulations, such as in the enhanced cooperation procedure, but using the European Union institutions to carry out the necessary work. This should also be possible in this context and it concerns the Commission in particular. It would be wrong to establish parallel structures which would move increasingly far apart and prevent the community from remaining a cohesive whole in the long term. We must avoid this at all costs. If we do not react responsibly and correctly in the weeks to come, we could see a split starting to form.
It must also be made clear that the community method and the intergovernmental method are not of equal importance. The intergovernmental method is simply an aid to be used when the community method is not available for reasons relating to the Treaty. Therefore, we must ensure that in the case of a possible treaty modification, the matter can be transferred to community policy without major problems, as we have done with Schengen and with many other examples in the past.
This calls for a radical solution, which, at the same time, also provides clear legal structures, so that the countries which are not included can be certain that they will be involved when they fulfil the conditions. It must also guarantee that the small countries are on an equal footing, because we know that the community structures not only ensure cohesion but also decision-making ability in the long term. We have yet to find out how difficult the intergovernmental approach will be in the case of the competitiveness pact.
There are three areas. The first of these is the stability and growth pact, which involves normal legislation and the community method. There is also the Treaty modification, which brings with it the risk of break up, and the competitiveness pact, which definitely needs further discussion. Parliament must demonstrate that it is responsible and we must do the same within our group. We know how important the date of 24 March and the following Monday are. I believe that we are not working towards an ideal solution, but if we act responsibly, the other institutions and, in particular, the Council should do the same.
Our idea is that we should accept the intergovernmental approach as a transitional solution. This is connected with the powers of the institutions and, specifically, the Commission on this issue. The Council should be available for discussions over the next few days. This means that we are prepared to debate this question, in order to overcome the problems that we have in this House, because the small countries and the countries outside the euro area feel that they are at a disadvantage as a result of the specific way in which the competitiveness pact has been initiated. All of this makes our work difficult. I would like to help ensure that there is a majority in favour of this plan within the necessary deadline. I hope that the Council will give us the opportunity during the course of our discussions to put this majority together."@en1
|
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples