Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2011-06-08-Speech-3-111-000"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20110608.5.3-111-000"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Although there were grounds for freezing EU expenditure during the economic crisis, we cannot use the same arguments that we did two years ago when considering the Multiannual Financial Framework today. Instead, we must ask ourselves questions regarding the principles governing the EU’s functioning in the next seven-year period: is it to be an EU based on solidarity, which fulfils its obligations and establishes an innovative economy and a common foreign policy in line with the Treaty of Lisbon? Or is it instead to be an EU which did admittedly include ambitious objectives in the Treaty, but which everyone knows was only playing make-believe? I am a staunch advocate of the former, and I support the rapporteur’s opinion as regards the need to increase funding in the next Multiannual Financial Framework by 5% compared to 2013 levels. This change would bring us closer to achieving the ambitious goals enshrined in the Treaty, and a 5% increase in expenditure would actually mean a very small increase, since inflation currently stands at 3.2%. Furthermore, this insignificant increase in the EU budget will benefit the poorest regions, which gain most from EU assistance granted in order to ensure that differences in development are overcome. I hope that the next Presidency, which will be held by Poland, will make it a priority to reconcile the positions of the ‘net payers’, such as Germany, France and the United Kingdom, with Parliament’s position, as set out in the ambitious Garriga Polledo report."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples