Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-06-01-Speech-4-113"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20060601.20.4-113"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs decided, by a very large majority, that we should not, by means of this report, pass judgment on individual countries, but only express a view on the conditions for membership of the euro zone.
On the basis of that decision, I have recommended that we should reject the three amendments tabled by the Liberals. I learned yesterday evening at five past eleven that the Social Democrats had abandoned this position, and would therefore recommend to the whole House that it vote a different way. What I would like is for the plenary to vote in favour of Slovenia, that is, to say ‘yes’ to it, and do the same with Amendments 1 and 3 on Estonia, but firmly reject the Liberals’ Amendment 2, which implies that the Commission and the European Central Bank have made gross errors in assessing the situation in Lithuania and that the Commission should therefore submit a revised version of its convergence report.
Although almost everyone in this Chamber is in favour of the speedy enlargement of the euro zone, if this House wants to maintain its own credibility, if we want to be taken seriously, then we cannot express ourselves contrary to the rules of the Treaty and the Maastricht criteria. I therefore ask that we, in a roll-call vote, should vote against Amendment 2 and in favour of Amendments 1 and 3."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples