Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-12-13-Speech-2-035"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2005-12-13"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Draft general budget 2006, as modified by the Council (all sections) - Mobilisation of the flexibility instrument - Draft amending budget No 8/20052
dcterms:Language	"pt"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20051213.6.2-035"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2005-12-13-Speech-2-0362
lpv:speaker	lp:Pedro Guerreiro2
lpv:spokenAs	member; REGI (2005-03-08--2007-01-14)3 member; PECH (2005-03-08--2007-01-14)3 member; EUL/NGL (2005-01-13--2009-07-13)3 substitute; TRAN (2005-01-18--2007-01-14)3 unknown; Partido Comunista Português (2005-01-13--2009-07-13)3 member; Delegation to the EU-Mexico Joint Parliamentary Committee (2005-03-08--2009-07-13)3 substitute; Delegation to the ACP-EU Joint Parliamentary Assembly (2005-01-18--2009-07-13)3
lpv:translated text	"Generally speaking, there is no harm in comparing the 2006 ceiling, and the Community’s budget priorities, which stands at around 1.01% of Community GNI, with the 2005 figure, or with the proposals made by the Luxembourg and British Presidencies for the 2007-2013 Financial Framework. Let us not forget, however, that the Financial Framework for 2000-2006 provided for 1.08% of GNI for the following year, that Parliament’s proposal for the 2007-2013 Financial Framework provides for 1.0% and that the Commission is proposing around 1.14%. In recent years, there has been a real terms reduction in the Community budget, which some are trying to set at around 1%. That would mean that the Structural Funds would account for 0.36% to 0.37% of Community GNI, which would suit the most economically advanced countries in the EU. Once again, a mindset has taken hold that oddly views every concession as a victory, in reference to each increasingly damaging proposal."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph