Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2012-02-15-Speech-3-351-500"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20120215.18.3-351-500"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"I supported the resolution on the feasibility of introducing stability bonds because this resolution sets out reasons for the need to introduce euro-securities and explains the measures required for them to be introduced. It is clear that changes are taking place in Europe, but this is particularly true in the European monetary union, namely, in the countries that have introduced the euro. Each of these countries has a different economic situation, debt level, growth prospects and so on. However, the European Central Bank, which oversees European monetary union, does not have the authority to issue euro-securities with the highest credit rating. Stability bonds or euro-securities would mean accountability on the part of all the euro states for the joint debt. Certainly, the introduction of such securities in the current situation is not possible, because more stringent fiscal conditions are necessary for the euro area states, in order to reduce the risk should any Member State be unable to pay back its debt. After it has joined the euro area, it will be advantageous for Latvia to introduce European stability bonds or euro-securities, because they will have the highest credit rating; that is to say, countries in the euro area would be able to borrow extremely cheaply because of the low interest rates."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples