Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2012-09-12-Speech-3-015-000"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20120912.4.3-015-000"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, that is the first bit of good news we have had today. Maybe Mr Barroso is going to tell us that he is in fact going to turn the federation of nation states into a federal union. Then we will certainly have unanimity in the Chamber today.
That brings me finally to my third point, the proposal that we have on the table today, which is the creation, the establishment of a single financial supervisory authority by giving more powers to the European Central Bank. I have to tell you, Mr Barroso, I think it is a good idea that we have that, because we need a single supervisor. But I have some question marks on the model that we are choosing today because, let us be honest, what we are doing is mainly copying the
. In most of our countries – in Britain it is the case, in Belgium, in the Netherlands and in Germany too – you have a split between a monetary authority on the one hand and financial supervision of banks on the other. I cannot understand why we cannot merge the three institutions that we have today into what we call a financial supervisory agency or authority, so that we do not mix a financial supervision task with a monetary authority.
I see a number of possible conflicts today: euro zone banks versus non-euro zone banks; banks versus other financial institutions. I see a problem between the ECB and the EBA. The EBA is creating the roadmap and the ECB is applying the roadmap.
I also see a problem on democratic accountability, because democratic accountability is not compatible with the independence of the Bank. So my proposal to you, Mr Barroso, is to look further into that question and also to change the legal basis. My proposal and suggestion to you and Mr Barnier is not only to use Article 127 as a legal base, but also Article 114, so that we have full codecision with Parliament on such an important matter in the future.
So I conclude, Mr President, but I have a little more time as you interrupted me in the beginning of my speech – with good news, so there is no criticism from my side. I think it is absolutely necessary now, Mr Barroso, that not only do we hear a good speech from you but that you put forward a whole package of legislative proposals in the way Parliament wants. Because do not forget that your legitimacy comes from this House, from this Parliament, and it is also this House that can take it back.
Mr President, even after the decision of the Constitutional Court – I am always a little bit critical when we talk about the Constitutional Court, as if there were no constitutional courts in other EU countries for the moment, but maybe in the future we can give them as much attention as we have given to Karlsruhe – there are still three remarks to be made.
First, it is not the European Central Bank that will solve the crisis. The European Central Bank can help; the European Bank has done the unavoidable in that for the third time already – after Trichet with SMP, after the LTRO – Draghi has bought us time again. But this is a stop-gap solution; this is not a structural solution to this crisis and it is a mistake to think in this House that, if the ECB comes in, then our problems are over. No, our problems are only over if we have the courage to create the federal union that is so desperately needed. Do not think that this new measure of Draghi can work for more than five or six months. The crisis will come back if we do not assume responsibility – that is my second remark today, dear colleagues.
We all know what the solution is. We all know – besides a number of individuals on the other side of the plenary – that we need an economic union, we need a political union, we need a fiscal union. We all know that is the solution. I find it unthinkable that we are still waiting to come forward with proposals and what are we doing, in fact? Waiting for the outcome of the German elections or something like that, because that is the political reality for the moment.
I stress that I think it is very good, Mr Barroso, that today you have introduced a proposal for a single financial supervisor, which is one of the three building blocks for a banking union. But what I do not understand is why the Commission is not also taking the initiative on the other building blocks that are needed to solve this crisis.
We desperately need a resolution mechanism for the banks. The establishment of an economic government and a treasury in Europe: we need it desperately, if we want to solve the crisis. The mutualisation of debt by the establishment of redemption funds: even the chief of the German
last week said – and he is the former Minister of Finance in Bavaria, a good member of the CSU – that it is absolutely necessary that we have a redemption fund if we want to solve this crisis. Furthermore he, the chief of the whole
in Germany, has asked the European Commission to take the initiative in that regard.
So my question to you, Mr Barroso, is why these two standards? If the European Council in June was asking you to come forward with a proposal for a banking union within two months – and that is a good thing – why is Mr Barnier not putting forward a proposal for a banking union? If this Parliament has already asked the Commission four times, in the Two-Pack and in the resolutions, to come forward with a redemption fund, which is a real structural solution to this crisis, why do we receive nothing at all? Why is the European Council more important than the European Parliament when you come forward with your own initiatives? Why?
I believe that we are in a balanced Union. You have the Council and you have Parliament. If Parliament requests that you come forward with a package of legislative proposals to end this crisis, it is your obligation and duty to do that. We are still waiting. We are still waiting for, I do not know what, perhaps the green light from Berlin or from of Paris before you take action in that regard."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
"Banque de France"1
"Sparkasse"1
|
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples