Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-05-17-Speech-3-030"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20000517.2.3-030"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, over the past few days, the debate on a European economic government has gained momentum once again in different quarters. It is evident that more economic management is required at European level, but it is not so evident that only the 11 euro zone countries or the Ecofin Council will need to take on that coordination. At the Lisbon Summit, a decision was made precisely in favour of a wider socio-economic approach in which employment, economic reform and social cohesion are seen as being interrelated. In my opinion, the key conclusion that was reached at that summit was that the European Council will itself adopt an active, guiding and coordinating role. Each spring, our government leaders will discuss the socio-economic policy on the basis of an integrated progress report from the European Commission.
Unfortunately, spring had already started this year. The text for the broad economic guidelines for 2000 had already been drafted, very much along established lines. Why did the Commission not take more time and, in line with Lisbon, draft the guidelines in an interdisciplinary manner, as prepared by the different DGs? Why do we not let the Commission continue with, and further develop, this type of cooperation, which also typified the preparatory work for Lisbon, in a socio-economic field? That seems to me a highly interesting challenge for the Commission’s new Secretary General, David O'Sullivan.
I would suggest taking into account conclusion 29 of the present report, which advocates a drastic renewal of the intellectual apparatus behind economic policy-making to bring it in line with the Lisbon conclusions. I would also like to make reference to the conclusions of this Parliament’s Committee on Employment and Social Affairs, compiled by Mr Cocilovo. He proposes the drawing up of a single annual report on the economic and social state of the Union, and one set of annual guidelines for sustainable growth, employment and social cohesion. One additional suggestion I would like to make is to include the socio-economic forum, which is scheduled for next month, earlier on in the annual cycle, i.e. at the very beginning of the year. At the moment, it is just tacked on at the end.
Finally, I would like to draw the attention of the Members of the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs to the consensus-oriented cooperation which we have enjoyed in the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs in this sphere and add that we in this Parliament should break though the compartmentalisation and endeavour to rise above the hobbyhorses of this or the other side and to have an input in, for example, next month’s forum, precisely on that basis."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples