Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2010-05-19-Speech-3-014"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2010-05-19"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Outcome of the summit of 7 May 2010 and the ECOFIN meeting - What is the political relevance of the EU 2020 strategy in the context of the current financial and economic crisis? - Consequences of the financial and economic crisis on the EU 2020 strategy and its governance - What is the relevance of the EU 2020 strategy in the framework of the current financial and economic crisis? (debate)2
dcterms:Language	"en"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20100519.3.3-014"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2010-05-19-Speech-3-0152
lpv:speaker	lp:Timothy Kirkhope2
lpv:spoken text	"Mr President, it has sadly become a characteristic of some of those who speak in support of the European Union to believe that the solution to every problem is more integration. This approach misses the point. What Europe too often lacks is not extra mechanisms to implement agreed policies, but rather the political will to fulfil commitments which have already been made but not executed. I therefore earnestly hope that the Europe 2020 initiative, which is certainly necessary to deal with the underlying economic crisis faced by Europe, does not fail on the same basis. Concerning the eurozone crisis, however, we are told that, to avoid similar crises in the future, the Union needs powers to call for the prior presentation of draft budgets by sovereign governments and to impose tougher sanctions on Member States – but budget information was already supposed to be available; it was just inaccurate and poorly scrutinised. Would the quality of information and the competence of those analysing the data improve just because a more demanding procedure was introduced? Sanctions were previously available; they simply lacked credibility. Increasing their scope does not make them any more likely to be imposed. Would the new measures be taken any more seriously? Furthermore, issuing debt, which risks increasing the EU budget and directly guaranteeing EU lending, is a major departure that undermines the principles of sound public finance which we are supposed here to be reinforcing. In the ECR, we want the euro to be a success for the sake both of those who choose to join and of those in the wider European economy, but this requires Member States to take their responsibilities seriously, to be honest with each other, and to fulfil their agreed commitments. By its own admission, the Commission believes its proposals will lead to a substantial deepening of economic and monetary union. It is little wonder that, whereas the English version of the text of the March summit referred to ‘governance’, which is what the Commission has also referred to, the French version referred to ‘government’. It seems that, for some, a centralised European economic ‘government’ is indeed the ambition, but this would not address the problems we face: it would be bad for our citizens, for our Member States and, I say, for the European Union itself."@en1
lpv:spokenAs	unknown; Conservative Party (2009-07-14--2014-06-30)3 deputy_chair; PECH (2009-07-16--2011-12-12)3 member; Delegation for relations with the United States (2009-09-16--2014-06-30)3 substitute; CULT (2009-09-09--2012-01-18)3 member; LIBE (2009-07-16--2012-01-18)3
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata	"Timothy Kirkhope,"1 "on behalf of the ECR Group."1
lpv:videoURI	<go to Events_and_structure europarl>2

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph