Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2012-06-12-Speech-2-073-000"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2012-06-12"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Economic and budgetary surveillance of Member States with serious difficulties with respect to their financial stability in the euro area - Monitoring and assessing draft budgetary plans and ensuring the correction of excessive deficit of the Member States in the euro area (debate)2
dcterms:Language	"pl"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20120612.5.2-073-000"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2012-06-12-Speech-2-074-0002
lpv:speaker	lp:Sławomir Nitras2
lpv:spokenAs	unknown; Platforma Obywatelska (2009-07-14--2014-06-30)3 substitute; PECH (2012-01-19--2014-06-30)3 member; EPP (2009-07-14--2014-06-30)3 substitute; Delegation for relations with the countries of Southeast Asia and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) (2011-09-29--2014-06-30)3 member; Delegation to the EU-Russia Parliamentary Cooperation Committee (2009-09-16--2014-06-30)3 member; ECON (2012-01-19--2014-06-30)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, today’s debate is yet another debate and yet another step on the way back to re-implementing the principles of the Stability and Growth Pact. This is always a difficult debate in the European Parliament, and those of us who remember the debate on the ‘six-pack’ – and that is surely all of us – will know how difficult it was to reach an agreement on the issue. Today, we are talking about enhanced surveillance of Member States to which assistance will ultimately be granted or is already being granted, and monitoring of the budgetary plans of the Member States. Everyone seems to agree in theory with the Commission’s proposals as regards the need for monitoring and surveillance of Member States which receive financial assistance, so this debate has focused on the precise nature of the criteria – should we use strict criteria to monitor, or, in other words, the principles of the Stability and Growth Pact, or should we relax the criteria? I would like to remind the House that we are talking about reducing the debt of the Member States in the euro area, and not about increasing debt. I have the impression after listening to this debate that some Members are suggesting we should grant assistance and monitor it, but not put in place any criteria to ensure that it has a real impact. I would like to remind everyone that the objectives have been the same for a long time and that they have not changed. The question is the extent to which they should be implemented. The objective is 3%, and it will never change, but it is not new either; it is an objective we have had in place for a long time, but which has not been put into practice. My final comment relates to the debt redemption fund. We often make the point in this Chamber that some banks use clever tricks to sell money which does not exist. I am afraid that the idea behind this fund is a trick, and it reminds me of the kind of trick which boils down to pretending there is no debt when, in fact, there still is."@en1
lpv:videoURI	<go to Events_and_structure europarl>2

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph