Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-10-26-Speech-4-008"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20061026.3.4-008"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, Mr President of the European Central Bank, ladies and gentlemen, the annual report of the European Central Bank always offers an opportunity for the European Parliament to review monetary policy and to supplement the work carried out by the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs through the monetary dialogue conducted four times a year with the President of the European Central Bank. You will all remember that last year we rejected the report, as it did not correspond to the guidelines advocated by this Parliament.
The year 2005 was an unusual year, in which the Central Bank initiated a movement raising interest rates five times, the first of which was on 1 December. These successive rises took place in an unusual economic context, determined by both the rise in oil prices and a disadvantageous exchange rate for euro zone exports, and in the context of an upturn in economic growth considered by more acute observers as fragile.
In these circumstances, this report specifically invites the Central Bank to analyse carefully the conditions in which it conducts its monetary policy. I am pleased that this report also emphasises that euro-dollar parity is important to growth in the European Union and that it draws from this a number of conclusions, which have been drafted in a spirit of compromise, bearing in mind the need for each monetary authority to exercise in full its responsibilities in terms of exchange rates. I hope that this compromise will still be present at the time of the vote.
I should like to express my regret, nonetheless, that it was not possible in this report to include both the subject of household debt and the improvement needed in the coordination of economic policies. Allow me, Mr President, to mention a number of points on which I believe this report provides original and valuable insights.
Consider, for example, the invitation made to the Central Bank to examine closely the use of EUR 500 notes and the possibility of freezing the issue of these notes. Let us come now to the key issue for this Parliament, namely the conditions in which democratic control is exercised and the way in which the Central Bank operates as an institution. From this point of view, we wanted to make our contribution, before the next renewal of a member of the Executive Board, to the necessary debate that must take place among the institutions in order that the members of the Executive Board may represent the interests of the euro zone in the best way possible. We believe that, to this end, the best approach would be to apply to the ECB the arrangement seen on the executive boards of all other central banks, namely a variety of backgrounds and a balance of portfolios. We are in agreement within this Parliament on requesting that the balance between nations should not be enshrined as an eternal status quo, and we believe, moreover, that a variety of backgrounds should enable the contributions and plurality within the Executive Board to be enhanced.
I also hope that this Parliament will advocate that the Council, when giving its opinion on approving a nomination to the Board, should exercise its decision-making power in full by making its choice on the basis of a number of different candidates. I am familiar with the argument used frequently by yourself, Mr President of the European Central Bank, and also used by Jean-Claude Trichet from time to time: having several candidates would damage the careers of those not accepted for the position.
Allow me to say that, as observers of international nomination procedures, our assessment is entirely different. At international level, the only post that is filled without competition or without a variety of candidates – and I come from a party that, as you know, is currently experiencing this process and all its virtues – is the Presidency of the World Bank. This process does not apply in the case of the International Monetary Fund, the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development or the World Trade Organisation. That is why we believe that, from this point of view, the euro zone as an integrated area should allow a number of different candidates.
Obviously, we also request that the European Parliament should finally be given the power to approve the appointment of the members of the Executive Board, which, in my opinion, would only strengthen the Board’s authority and legitimacy and ability to embody a strong voice for the euro zone, on the international stage also. This is the primary objective of this Parliament, namely that, on the international stage, the Central Bank, alongside the Council and the Eurogroup, should be the key legitimate spokesman that we need for Europe’s voice to carry loud and clear on such important subjects as you have wanted to raise, Mr President, and on which this Parliament would like to make a contribution. I am of course thinking of the question of the alternative funds, on which, I hope, the compromise drawn up by the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs will be supported by all the groups at the time of the vote."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples