Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2011-07-05-Speech-2-571-000"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20110705.37.2-571-000"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, the debate which we are holding today is the start of a decisive argument about the future of the EU. Budgets reflect what politicians expect from a country or a confederation of countries or what they will allow a confederation like the EU to do.
The Commission says that our approach is ambitious and bold. I want to emphasise this, even though, Mr Barroso, you naturally present the figures in a more favourable light than we see them in, and we will forgive you for this. Our positions are not far apart, but it is important to be clear about the figures. On average 1.12% of the gross domestic product of the Member States is currently available. According to your draft, the figure in future will be 1.05%. This does not sound like much. The fact is that our initial analyses show that you are freezing the budget on the basis of the current figure. We will have to come back to this, because the Member States that are on the other side from the Commission are expecting a significant increase in spending.
You have mentioned several examples. There is not just the ITER nuclear fusion reactor, which I think is superfluous, GALILEO, the External Action Service and the development of democracies in North Africa that will be our partners in future. There are also many other tasks which have to be financed and with less money. The Commission proposal seems bold when we look at the Member States.
The attitude of the Member States and, in particular, the large net contributors is easy to describe: more European tasks with less money. That simply will not work. Therefore, the decisive issue will be whether we, the European institutions, can stand together, whether the Commission and Parliament, the two community institutions, can achieve solidarity in order to push through an ambitious, bold budget in the face of opposition from part of the European Council of Heads of State or Government.
Firstly, a call to Parliament itself: in this House we have many experienced and self-confident budget experts. So much became clear as we listened to Mr Garriga. They are all members of the Group of the European People’s Party (Christian Democrats) and, behind me, of the Group of the Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats in the European Parliament and the Group of the Greens/European Free Alliance. We have just seen the little PPE group conference around the table. They are all highly qualified Members, but the situation is rather like a football game. A group of star players does not necessarily make up an effective winning team.
What we need to do in Parliament is to come together and develop a common line which has a broad majority in this House. If our line is close to the Commission proposal, we will have achieved a high level of complementarity between our strategy and theirs. This high level of complementarity is necessary because there are governments like the Polish Government on the European Council. This is a bold, pro-European government which supports the European Parliament.
I would like to make one thing quite clear to you, Mr Dowgielewicz. Your speech here, despite being brief, has already shown that the Polish Presidency wants the European Union to be successful. We had a debate this morning in which the outgoing presidency gave a different impression. It is encouraging that you want to join us on this path.
There are also governments like that of Mr Cameron who wants a different Europe with 0.8% of gross domestic product, while, of course, keeping the British rebate. He wants a large free-trade area with as few rules as possible, but no political union. This is not the sort of Europe that I want and I believe that the overwhelming majority of this House does not want it either. The question of whether or not this is what we will get depends on whether or not we can push through this ambitious, medium-term EU budget.
If the Commission takes a bold approach and Parliament fulfils its role effectively, we can defend Europe on this issue and we will be the winners when it comes to the medium-term financial plan."@en1
|
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples