Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2012-09-12-Speech-3-528-000"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20120912.27.3-528-000"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"−
Mr President, Commissioner, I should first of all address the Council but, on occasions such as these, it is never here. It is therefore rather difficult to negotiate like that of course. Therefore, I am going to address you to tell you that we must make sure that we do not distort reality.
We have an agreement. It is not that there remains a small obstacle to an agreement; we have an agreement. Simply, one of the two parties did not keep the promise it had made in public. There is therefore a real problem of confidence between the negotiating partners. I am sorry, these things are just not done.
They may have realised in retrospect that they had gone too far, that they had made too many concessions, but it was a matter for them. It was for them to prepare and manage their negotiations properly. If they are incapable of doing so, that is their lookout. That is what it is like in business. If you are outsmarted because of poor negotiating skills, that is the price you pay. The Council spurns this House too often to be passed the sponge and to be told, ‘We understand that you have messed up a bit, so we are going to discuss it again’. No! I am in favour of an agreement at first reading. Well, it is very easy. If we want an agreement at first reading, we keep our word, they keep theirs and that is it, end of story. If they want to do something else, it is going to be expensive, it is going to be hard and it could go on and on. You are going to say that it will take an important issue hostage. Yes, of course. It is not the first time either that the Council has taken Parliament hostage on other issues. They must stop abusing our trust, because I find that unconscionable.
As for the compromise proposals, the Commission, always disposed to put forward proposals, is clearly recognisable and I very much welcome that. I just want to say that the Alternative Investment Fund Managers (AIFM) clause is exactly what we did not want. The AIFM clause is a paper tiger! Today, according to the OECD, there is no longer any jurisdiction on their black list. You are in Liechtenstein? You are ‘clean’! You are in the Cayman Islands? You are ‘clean’! You are ‘clean’ throughout the world! There are no tax havens any more. We no longer have to fight against tax havens. It is precisely to avoid this situation that we want to establish in an article – and not just in recitals – serious standards on tax havens.
They must stop making us empty promises just to please us, telling us, ‘Look, we are working hard to combat tax havens’. This kind of cinema is over.
I would like to thank Ms Auconie and the many shadow rapporteurs who are here. In any event, we worked well together, and we intend to continue to do so. It is therefore not just a Green telling you that it is going to be hard if the Council persists, it is the entire Parliament telling you."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata | |
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples