Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-06-07-Speech-2-158"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20050607.25.2-158"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, like my honourable colleague Mr van den Berg, I shall begin by speaking on behalf of the Committee on International Trade then go on to speak as the first contributor from our group. Let me say, on behalf of the committee, that we cannot but thank the rapporteur for the quality of his work and for the manner in which the deliberations were conducted within the Temporary Committee.
Our Committee on International Trade formulated a number of recommendations, which are, I would say, fiscally prudent and therefore all the more acceptable to our Committee. I believe that one of the features of our resolution was its emphasis on the importance, in the framework of the WTO negotiations, of ensuring that the Union, through its budget, can render assistance to the African, Caribbean and Pacific countries in particular with a view to laying good foundations for these negotiations. I do not suppose that this is one of the main points of the present discussion, but we nevertheless wish to underline it.
Now, as one of the speakers from my group – Mrs Buitenweg, our coordinator, will speak on behalf of the group later – I should like to say two things. Firstly, the reason why the Group of the Greens/European Free Alliance has tabled an alternative resolution is that we felt that, in this game for three players or institutional triangle, the message conveyed by Parliament ought to reinforce that of the Commission and support the Commission’s proposals and that, on some budget items, we should even signal a desire to go beyond the Commission’s proposals while remaining within the limits authorised by the Treaties. That is why – and we shall return to this point – we sought to accentuate a number of priorities, especially in the field of rural development and also in the domains of education and culture.
Secondly, I should also like to address a few words to the Council Presidency. It is obviously inappropriate to bombard the Presidency, because we know the Presidency, and we know it is doing its level best, as they say. The real targets for criticism are those countries – the members of the one-per-cent club – which want to have their cake and eat it, to put it colloquially. From this point of view, we need an agreement, but an agreement at all costs is no solution. In spite of everything, the Commission’s proposal and that of the Council still differ by EUR 150 billion over the seven-year period."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples