Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2012-06-12-Speech-2-037-000"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20120612.5.2-037-000"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, as group chair, I volunteered for this debate because I want to emphasise how important this legislation is. For us, this is one of the most important pieces of legislation that we have, and I would like to offer my sincere thanks to the two rapporteurs, Ms Ferreira and Mr Gauzès, for their work, as well as the other group representatives who helped.
I am not absolutely sure what Ms Thyssen meant. I hope, at least, that we can reach real agreement, that we will tomorrow have a clear majority in the vote, as was the case in the committee. We support this compromise. We have a single wish that I would like to go into. We support this compromise and it is quite important that Parliament should make its decision with a high degree of unanimity. We say this because, with this legislation – and we need this message to go out to our Heads of State or Government and our citizens, too – we are also fundamentally changing the basic conditions for economic policy and economic governance in Europe.
We have already done a lot, but we actually did not need the Fiscal Compact at all, as we are creating fundamental new conditions through the combination of the ‘six-pack’ and now the ‘two-pack’. If we were critical at the time of many things in the ‘six-pack’, that makes us even more in favour of the ‘two-pack’, as it corrects and adds a number of elements, so that we really have an overall package here that goes considerably beyond what we had before.
There are two crucial points to which I would still like to draw attention. I do concede one thing to Ms Thyssen, which is that we need to get past the debts. We can only get past the debts, however, if we also lower the interest rates. We are well aware – as demonstrated by Spain – that we will not get past the debts as long as we have this high interest burden. That being the case, the idea of a debt redemption fund is very much the right way to go. Many of us – me included – believe that we have to go further. We have to move towards eurobonds, with fiscal prerequisites, of course, which are precisely what we are putting in place with the ‘six-pack’ and the ‘two-pack’. Do we now give our support to the compromise on a debt redemption fund? Listening to some of what the Group of the European People’s Party (Christian Democrats) has to say, I have to hope that they do not go through with it, that this is not now rejected again, and that we really are able to hold on to this compromise.
My second point is a special request on the part of Mr Monti. We should not leave Mr Monti high and dry when it comes to investments and specific, very limited, precisely defined growth investments. The situation is that we still have the Europe 2020 targets, but we often do not have the investments. This no longer applies necessarily to the national level, but often to the local level. It is therefore very important to give priority to these investments for growth as that, too, represents a considerable contribution to avoiding the debts if we have growth. To that end, I hope for broad support, a broad consensus, in the vote tomorrow."@en1
|
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples