Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-06-07-Speech-2-191"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20050607.25.2-191"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Mr President, may I begin by saying that Reimer Böge has done a really good job with this report. He has managed to reflect the position of the committee faithfully. Not everyone will agree with the full contents of the report, but overall it is very good and he is to be congratulated.
Different views are represented in this House, whether it be on agriculture, structural funds or whatever. You cannot please all of the people all of the time, but that is not such a bad thing. You have not pleased us, because, as you would expect, the main point of departure for the British Labour delegation is the implied reference to the United Kingdom rebate.
In this part of the debate I seem to be a voice in the wilderness, but I will carry on. I refer to recital N, which I totally disagree with, and also to paragraph 8 and the fifth indent of paragraph 51. I have always made it clear in the temporary committee that own resources and the Financial Perspective are two separate issues, and never before has there been an attempt to link them under any of the previous IIAs. That is why the British Labour delegation is hesitant about supporting the report.
The report will certainly give Parliament a good starting point for negotiations with the Council, which I welcome. Of course, until we know Council's agreed position, if there is one, it is difficult to say how those negotiations will go. I suppose it is still possible in theory that the Council will agree with Parliament's figures, or even go higher. Some of us live in hope.
However, from the beginning when Members raised the issue of linking the Financial Perspective with a new system of own resources, I have used the phrase "get real" on at least three occasions. We have to ‘get real’ about what the Council will do. This is not going to happen. In the remaining three weeks of the Luxembourg presidency, for all its skilful diplomacy I would be surprised if this were to be part of any package, if indeed the Council has a position. I personally believe that the present own resources system is opaque and we need something more transparent, so that taxpayers can understand how the EU is financed. That discussion and decision will take place in a different House at a different time. I know that will not please colleagues in my Group, but we have to live in the real world and recognise the limits of our competencies.
If the British delegation abstains on this report, it is for the reason that I have outlined. As for the future, I wish you well when you start the conciliation negotiations."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
"Terence Wynn (PSE )."1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples