Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-06-12-Speech-3-271"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20020612.6.3-271"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, I must first of all offer my congratulations and thanks to the rapporteur, Mr Marques.
I congratulate him because he has produced an excellent report responding to a demand from the Canary Islands – one of the outermost regions of the Union that has some specific tax features, supported on a sound legal basis (Article 299(2) of the Treaty). I thank him because, through his excellent work and his flexibility, he has managed to gather a solid parliamentary majority around him which makes it seem likely that the report will be approved within the next few hours, which will put an end to a long parliamentary journey that began almost two years ago.
The economic and fiscal regime of the islands is the backbone of the statute of autonomy and self-government of the Canary Islands, the current version of which derives from the Treaty on European Union and Spain’s Treaty of Accession to the European Communities, although over the centuries – ever since we were brought under the Crown of Castile, even before Castile was Spain – it has often been modified to suit the circumstances of the moment.
The question is therefore about certain historical rights, which are no lower in status than the fiscal peculiarities of Luxembourg or some of the British Isles, to mention only the case of countries where these measures have come up against some stiff opposition, paradoxical though it may seem. Those Members who have tried – and are still trying – to change the rapporteur’s text with their amendments are upholding legitimate interests – there is no doubt of that – but interests linked especially to the tobacco, alcoholic beverage and spirits lobbies, which do not now coincide with the interests of the Canary Islanders, the vast majority of whom have, through their legitimate representatives, declared their position along the lines of the Marques report. Just as the Spanish Government has done, by virtue of its Constitution, just as the European Commission is doing – it has seen that this project is valid and does not run counter to Community law – and as is reflected by the broad agreement within the Council, which may well approve it in a few days’ time, once Parliament has pronounced on it.
The Canary Islands will thus have a good economic policy instrument, which will allow them to diversify their resources and enhance their economic and social development, stop the decline of their already weak industrial sector and, if possible, stimulate its growth, especially in the food processing sector. If this happens, it will help retain jobs and create new ones in a region of high unemployment, while offering alternatives to the islands’ risky dependence on the tourist industry.
The Canary Islands cannot continue to grow just on the basis of receiving a few hundred thousand more tourists every year. This year we will have had twelve million visitors; this brings benefits, of course, but it also has sometimes devastating effects on our sustainable development: on some islands the annual number of tourists far outweighs the total number of permanent residents, generating a number of problems. These will only increase in future if we do not step in to correct this trend, which is what this regulation aims to do.
For all these reasons and others mentioned by the rapporteur and some of the speakers, this report must be approved and, as a member of the European People’s Party, that is what I hope will happen."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples