Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2012-11-21-Speech-3-038-000"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20121121.4.3-038-000"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"I believe that Parliament’s position is very clear as it was approved by almost 80 % of our colleagues at our October part-session. That position has nothing in common with what was subsequently proposed by the Presidency, and with Mr Van Rompuy’s position in particular. It is unacceptable for the European Parliament in its present form. Once again we are witnessing the European Council turning the discussion on the budget into an exercise in accounting, into a zero-sum game in which one has to win and another has to lose. This is not what the European budget is about. What Parliament is fighting for is an instrument for policies that are already determined. Who has determined these policies? The European Council itself. The same leaders who are now refusing to provide the finances to implement them. Who took the decision in June for a Compact for Growth and Jobs, which was supposed to be supported with EUR 150 billion? European leaders. Who took the decision and told young people that they will have more opportunities for free movement and training in Europe? European leaders. Who is promising developing countries that if they open their markets they will receive additional assistance? European leaders. Who is committing to fighting climate change? European leaders. We have made enough commitments. Their implementation, however, requires the corresponding budget. Therefore, when we talk about the budget we have to talk about the policies that have already been decided.
Here the English Conservatives, our colleagues, are concerned about English taxpayers and rightly so. Do they tell British taxpayers, however, how much English universities earn from the mobility of young people? How much English businesses gain from the common market, from common infrastructure? How many British researchers and scientists take part in common European projects? How many British companies spend public investment from the European budget? This is the other side of the truth that taxpayers should also be told. Let us really ask our regions, those in the developed, in the less developed, and in the most under-developed regions; if there are no European funds there are no public investments. That is a fact. If we limit them even further that would mean that the European budget does not solve the economic crisis but actually aggravates it. We do not want the European budget to be a procyclical measure. Furthermore, Parliament is equally opposed to it, i.e. to the macroeconomic conditionality that some Member States seek. Let us ask the non-governmental organisations working in the developing countries how many jobs are created in Europe and how much European companies themselves profit from the assistance for growth we give to developing countries. That is the other side of the coin.
Ladies and gentlemen, Parliament must take a decision on the European Council decision. I believe that if the European Council does not take into consideration our demands, there is no way that we could support such a decision."@en1
|
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples