Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2004-12-01-Speech-3-073"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20041201.11.3-073"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Does the Presidency agree with these priorities? And if it does, to what extent and at the expense of what expenditure?
Finally, Mr President-in-Office of the Council, Parliament is demanding – and previous speakers have done so – a commitment to a genuine and constant dialogue between the Council and Parliament. A genuine dialogue. Or does the Council think it can come to Parliament with a
and present it to Parliament for rubber-stamping?
If that is the case, I would like to say that, despite the apocalyptic description of a Community world without financial perspectives given by the Commissioner for budgets over recent days, increasing numbers of Members of Parliament will not accept financial perspectives which do not guarantee, and now I quote Mr Böge, ‘the correct implementation of the policies we have drawn up in the European Union’.
I would also like to tell the Council that nobody has more interest in the financial perspectives than Parliament, but not at any price. The European Parliament has been proposing that the financial perspectives be included in the Treaties since Maastricht, while the Council has only accepted it after the Convention has drawn up new financial provisions.
We, more than anybody, want to reach an agreement on the financial perspectives for after 2006. But not financial perspectives based on accountancy. At the end of the day, Mr President, we should never forget that the financial perspectives are an instrument, not an end in themselves."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
"fait accompli,"1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples