Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2012-06-13-Speech-3-303-003"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20120613.24.3-303-003"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"In order to prevent a future financial and economic crisis similar to the current one, we need a more coordinated policy in the euro area. To prevent imbalances in the public finances of the Member States, it is especially important to obtain adequate information in sufficient time on how budgets are being drafted. The fundamental idea that an independent agency outside the Member States (the European Commission) is needed to monitor budgets is understandable and acceptable, in the light of events in recent years.
The report by Ms Ferreira, which is part of the ‘two-pack’, tries to achieve this aim. However, some strange elements were incorporated into the fundamental idea during the Committee preparations for Ms Ferreira’s report. These include the call for the creation of a redemption fund (Amendment 27) and, in particular, the call for a growth fund, for which an investment of up to 1% of GDP (EUR 140 billion) over ten years is being proposed (Amendment 67). I voted against Amendments 27 and 67, but in favour of the report as a whole, because of its important basic aim to achieve more stringent financial discipline in the euro area. I was also confident about voting for the report as a whole because I do not believe that Amendments 27 and 67 have much chance of success in the trialogue negotiations between Parliament, the Council and the Commission."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples