Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2012-02-14-Speech-2-428-000"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20120214.21.2-428-000"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Mr President, I am presenting this oral question and resolution on behalf of the Economic and Monetary Affairs Committee. We postponed the debate from the last Strasbourg session as Commissioner Rehn could not attend. So we are disappointed that, once more, other duties have called him away.
We are well aware, in the Committee, of all the strands of the arguments, from those that inherently support common stability bonds to those of the opposite view. But we are of the view that, in some form, they are part of the picture. If we look back at our attempts to stabilise the euro zone crisis, they can be characterised as believing that, within a monetary union, a small part would not bring down the whole, just as one city or state does not bring down the US.
There has been a belief that, because of the political commitment of the whole, the deterioration in a highly-indebted Member State would not follow the path of that experienced in other individual indebted countries. We can blame delay and prevarication for our attempts always being behind the curve, but it is time to examine missing elements too, including the fact that what we do also marks the level of ambition and commitment to the next stage of evolution of the monetary union and to the euro’s place as a reserve currency. In other words, ambition counts: maybe even more so in this time of awful austerity. Therefore we are anxious to learn what are the interim results of the consultation on stability bonds and, based on the consultation, what are the next steps foreseen by the Commission.
Since the Green Paper was issued in October, there have been further political agreements – such as those of the European Council in December – which have also been carried forward. These decisions to enhance the sustainability of public finances also contribute towards creating the necessary conditions for the potential introduction of stability bonds. Therefore, what kind of policy instrument would be the most effective in the short term?
As I said with regard to ambition, stability bonds would show that there is a medium term plan beyond austerity. The ‘redemption pact’ proposed by the German Council of Economic Experts shows a long-term way that excess debt could be handled. There is some similarity between that plan and how the Australian states first moved to common issuance.
Neither should we overlook the possibility of short-term euro bills. I dubbed these once ‘the beginner’s bond’, but they could be both time- and quantity-limited, with good behaviour needed to allow rollover. Bills also have the advantage of lower interest rates and in these times of high debt, struggling fellow-Member States do need every single basis point squeezed off what they have to pay.
From a personal point of view, taking that overriding necessity of squeezing down debt servicing payments, I would see eventual recirculation of the profit element of bond interventions by the European Central Bank back to the indebted Member State as a reasonable manoeuvre.
Mr President, as I have not taken all my time, I would be happy if you would allocate the rest to Parliament’s rapporteur Sylvie Goulard."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata | |
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples