Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-11-17-Speech-1-138"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2003-11-17"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Excise duties on petrol and commercial diesel fuel2
dcterms:Language	"fr"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20031117.9.1-138"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2003-11-17-Speech-1-1392
lpv:speaker	lp:Pierre Jonckheer2
lpv:spokenAs	substitute; Delegation to the EU-Hungary Joint Parliamentary Committee (2002-02-06--2004-04-30)3 substitute; ECON (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3 member; Committee on Citizens' Freedoms and Rights, Justice and Home Affairs (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3 vice-chair; G/EFA (2002-01-08--2004-07-19)3 unknown; Ecolo (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 member; Delegation to the EU-Slovak Republic Joint Parliamentary Committee (2002-02-07--2004-04-30)3
lpv:translated text	"Madam President, Commissioner Bolkestein, it is not the first time that I have pointed out in plenary that my group shares your opinion, that is that we are particularly disappointed by the vote which took place in the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs, which in my view was a reactionary vote. Before I presented my comments I re-read the Commission proposal, the document of 24 July, and, both personally and on behalf of my group, I find the proposal made by your services to be of a very high quality, because it gives a very positive diagnosis and clearly explains the impact that we can expect from this proposal. I would like to once again stress to my fellow Members that the Commission made an extremely progressive proposal, which can be expected to have an impact in 2010-2012 for the candidate countries. It begins with an extremely weak central rate, which is the simple indexation of the rate that was in force as early as 1992 and, it is true, this means that some States will have to raise these rates. I also think that the comment from fellow Members, to the effect that an overall package should be proposed, is nothing more than a ploy to sidestep the issue; in other words, agreement will not be reached on the entirety of the measures proposed. I would also like to say – and in my view this is one of the reasons why this proposal was rejected by the main political groups – that you are obviously stressing the issue of distortion of competition but, if you carefully read the Commission proposal, you will clearly see that it seeks not, for example, to increase the overall tax burden of the States, it involves reorganising the national tax systems. For example, one proposal, which we support, is to reduce taxes on transport infrastructure and instead, to favour taxation according to use, which is the same index as that of the ‘polluter-pays’. It is clear that States do not want interference in the tax systems, but they are wrong. I would also like to say that, as regards the plan for sustainable development, the Commission paper stresses, according to the European Environment Agency that the external cost of transport represents 8% of GNP. I think that the Commission is right to stress that if the Council wants to respect the objectives, in particular regarding reducing pollutant emissions for private cars, then it must follow your proposals. Mr Bolkestein, you have the full support of my group, but I know that this will be insufficient. Nevertheless, we continue to battle on together; we will get there one day."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph