Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2008-10-08-Speech-3-040"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20081008.14.3-040"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Madam President, President of the Commission, ladies and gentlemen. I will be brief. I just want to tell you, having listened to you, that the first lesson I have learned from the first part of the French Presidency is that one crisis does not make the other crises go away.
Concerning what Mr Watson said, I agree with him that we do not need more regulation, but better adapted regulation. That is what is important. We are not dogmatists regarding regulation, either. As many of you have said, it is clear that to regain confidence, we need regulation in the areas mentioned, and it should be better adapted, more reactive regulation. There again, it is up to the Member States to shoulder their responsibilities in this regard.
Finally, as pointed out by Mr Wurtz, we must ensure that the European Investment Bank has an active role to play in the current context. The European Council will also be speaking about this, and we must take the measures necessary to ensure we have an institutional framework suited to financial groups, financial players that increasingly operate across borders. That is the real hiatus we have to face in this crisis: that really, the way we are organised remains totally national, while the challenges are
trans-European. Together we must find measures that enable us to change the method of regulation rather than over-regulating, and we must make sure Europe unites to make its voice heard in the forthcoming international meetings so that, unlike in the past, we do not have the rules of others and disorder of others imposed on us, for which we have to bear the consequences, but rather we can move towards a more stable international order, one that is more in keeping with the challenges we have to face on a global level.
The financial crisis does not make the external affairs crisis go away, with Russia and Georgia and in other parts of the world; the financial and external affairs crises do not make the food crises and environmental crises go away. All these challenges have to be faced, even if we have to adapt in order to maintain our priorities.
There are three types of priority. You highlighted the first in your speeches; it is the return of confidence – as the President of the Commission said – so that our fellow citizens feel more protected in relation to Europe and to prevent a gulf opening up between the European Union – the idea we all have of Europe – and our fellow citizens.
The second priority is to adapt our institutional system so we have a more involved Europe, a better organised Europe, a Europe more capable of deciding – and deciding quickly – because we know that none of these challenges can be dealt with individually or at national level.
The third priority is to move towards a development model that is more sustainable, more focused on the long term, and towards the equitable management of resources, while taking account of the very sudden
slow-down in our economies that, as we well know, we are going to be facing.
I fully support what the President of the European Commission said. We need to be fair, we have to make up for lost time and review certain dogmas. I think the Commission President has understood this and the proposals he is making are headed in the right direction. We clearly need to move towards greater integration and better financial supervision at European level.
I will not go back over the various measures listed, but obviously it is up to the Council and the Member States to shoulder their responsibilities and it is up to this Parliament to assume its responsibilities in relation to the proposals on the table – which are very necessary – concerning standards, the credit rating agencies, capital to credit ratios, directors' pay and the pay of others working in the banking sector (there is also traders' pay, which is not often talked about but it also seems to me to be an important problem). From this point of view, I believe that setting up the high-level group is an excellent initiative. I would just like to say, however, on behalf of the Presidency, that I would prefer it if its composition was more diverse and as broad as it could be while remaining effective. As the President of the Commission said, what is a liquidity crisis today should not turn into a credibility crisis tomorrow.
Mr Daul highlighted perfectly what changes should be made in relation to the objectives that remain, particularly as regards the energy/climate package. It is also very important, as he pointed out, that we have a dimension that supports SMEs, that the European Investment Bank really takes strong action. Consequently, the finance package that has been agreed is important and it needs to be implemented very quickly as regards support for small and medium-sized enterprises.
I agree with what Mr Schulz said. We need much more coordination. We need an action plan. We also need an action plan to support business. That is what Mr Schulz said and I go along with it entirely. He knows we will support him on this. As he already has good contacts with Mr Steinbruck, I think he will also be able to convince him."@en1
|
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples