Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2012-06-13-Speech-3-023-000"

PredicateValue (sorted: default)
rdf:type
dcterms:Date
dcterms:Is Part Of
dcterms:Language
lpv:document identification number
"en.20120613.6.3-023-000"2
lpv:hasSubsequent
lpv:speaker
lpv:spokenAs
lpv:translated text
"Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, in this debate, in which everyone is talking about a political Europe and European sovereignty, I want to examine the definition of sovereignty. There will only be political sovereignty if Europe has financial sovereignty. Otherwise, it will not work. I would like to give you a brief, very practical, illustration based on the problem we are now facing. Mr Verhofstadt is right: we will only achieve financial sovereignty if Europe manages to obtain its own resources. What does that mean? It simply means that, today, the Member States, including the French Government, are saying, ‘We can no longer increase the national contribution’. Fine! Let us accept the situation! It is up to them to decide. However, if, as the Commission has proposed, as we have discussed, we have a financial transaction tax, a European carbon tax, a mobile phone tax, these three possibilities – and I could give you others – would bring in an extra EUR 40 to 50 billion for the European budget. From this point on, the discussion becomes completely absurd. Now, we are told, ‘All right, if you have own resources, we will give all these resources back to the Member States’. The Commission’s much-vaunted proposal on the financial transaction tax posits a ‘two thirds/one third’ distribution. In other words, a third will be given directly to Member States, and the remaining two thirds to be allocated to the European Union will be deducted from national contributions. Consequently, 100% is given back to the Member States. There is no own resource. It is a resource diverted to the Member States and not a resource for the European Union. This will not enable us to move forward. Furthermore, the Council then tells us, ‘And you are going to further reduce the European budget’. Ladies and gentlemen, this is not an abstract debate. It is the very basis of the so-called political sovereignty of Europe. If we accept that own resources are resources for the Member States and not resources for the European budget, where do we go from here? We do not have to accept this sort of horse-trading. We do not have to say yes. The only possibility for Europe to be able to invest in order to create jobs and to sustain the cohesion funds is through increasing the European budget. Let us accept that national contributions are unable to finance it. However, own resources are the way to increase the European budget precisely to sustain the deficits of the economies of the Member States. It is not for the European Parliament that we want own resources; it is for the citizens of Europe. That is why I believe that the fight we are going to get into now, which will be a fight over the question ‘Do we accept that the budget should stay at its current level?’, would be a mistake. The truth is that, if there is no real increase in the European budget which will ensure that own resources become resources for the budget and not simply a return of resources to the Member States, if we do not have this power, this capacity, then, despite all the talk of European sovereignty and the need for more Europe, we will not succeed in delivering the necessary policies. It is our legitimacy, it is our credibility as Europeans that we are defending. That is why, when it comes to financial perspectives, we must say to the Council and to the Member States, ‘Do not assume that, this time, Parliament is going to lie down. You will see that you will not have any financial perspectives if you do not move consistently. Otherwise, stay at home! You are spending too much money with your summits and that is pointless’."@en1
lpv:videoURI

Named graphs describing this resource:

1http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/English.ttl.gz
2http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/Events_and_structure.ttl.gz
3http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/spokenAs.ttl.gz

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph