Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-03-11-Speech-2-252"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20030311.10.2-252"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"(FR) Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, I have to recognise that there are a number of reports on broadly the same subject. This being the case, we will not support the report drafted by Mr Trentin, whom I greatly admire. We will consider instead Mr García-Margallo y Marfil’s report.
The Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs is faced with a real operational problem. When a rapporteur from the left and a rapporteur from the right decide to address the same issue, the report from the left is pulled to pieces by honourable Members on the right. With a bit of luck, the report is approved when it is put forward by a rapporteur from the right. We must therefore recognise that the García-Margallo y Marfil report is much better and much more useful than Mr Trentin’s, now that it has been cut to ribbons by the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs. Be that as it may, I have long acknowledged that Mr García-Margallo y Marfil has demonstrated considerable qualities in his role as a rapporteur. As Mr Langen said, the Trentin report is clearly not actually a report drawn up by Mr Trentin. Mr Trentin’s speech almost entirely contradicted the contents of his report.
I will therefore only comment on the contents of the García Margallo y Marfil report, in its present form. It is my belief that the Group of the Greens/European Free Alliance support all the objectives and comments on the subject as included in the García-Margallo y Marfil report. It has the virtue of bringing the objectives of economic policy back into line with the Lisbon and Gothenburg objectives. We want to ensure that Europe is a model of economic growth. Growth should be based on high-quality investment in human resources, high-calibre public investment and on the use of environmentally-sustainable technologies. Given the size of the continent of Europe, which has one of the highest population concentrations in the world, it is my belief that this is the only way forward for the European Union.
The García-Margallo y Marfil report does contain discrepancies. It is forced to juggle the fact that the Stability and Growth Pact must be welcomed, while also acknowledging the need to finance investments. It acknowledges that the article in the Treaty of Maastricht which prevents European institutions from criticising the European Central Bank must not be undermined, while also stating that it is nonetheless necessary to provide credit at special rates for the required investments. It mentions taxation, not interest rates. In short, the report tends to skirt round the real problems of institutional impasse we are currently experiencing within the European Union. Next year these problems will catapult us back into the situation of so-called europaralysis we experienced during the dark years of working towards the euro from 1990 to 1997.
As we cannot control the interest rates fixed by the European Central Bank, interest rates will be too high. This will present problems for Member States wishing both to invest and pay off their debts. These excessive interest rates will also make the euro too strong. It will hamper exports at a time of global recession. Unless we resolve to tackle the Stability and Growth Pact as it currently stands, we will be unable to finance the investments Mr García-Margallo y Marfil calls for."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples