Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2010-07-06-Speech-2-016"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20100706.4.2-016"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, I shall make no remarks about football. I know you are all too clever for that. I shall only say it is a pity that Ghana has been eliminated. We can all agree on that, can we not? Good.
The attitude in this House to the statements made today – namely, that we are all satisfied – surprises me. We have indulged in empty rhetoric. Progress has been made, progress and further progress, and somehow I have the impression that apart from here, in this Chamber, no one has noticed. You might say that this is something to do with our inability at this time to communicate well enough, but that is not the problem. Plainly and simply, the problem is that we must face reality for once. The reality is this: we are making resolutions about 2020, but we are incapable of making a single penny available for the seven or eight flagship projects. That will not work. I can already see the Council saying that we must reduce the European budget because of the crisis. That means you can already mothball 2020.
We are always saying we want growth, growth, growth. Yes, but what sort of growth? Those who want growth cannot only get growth by saving. We need a European fund. Yes, but it must be a fund for solidarity and investment. Where today is Europe speaking about investment? Where? I have not heard it mentioned once in any of the speeches. Granted, you have perfected the Stability Pact, which means yet more sanctions that will not work unless you boost the economy. You can announce as many sanctions as you want, they will be of no avail. To achieve positive economic growth or, in other words, sustainable growth and green growth, you must also invest in certain sectors. I have heard nothing about that today – not a word.
I would like to reiterate something with regard to SWIFT. Mr Schulz, this House has decided on a single paragraph on SWIFT. When the Americans make a request, there must be a judicial authority to monitor whether or not the request is legitimate. Now comes the agreement that you approve of, and the answer is Europol. I did not know that Europol was a judicial institution – one learns something new every day. An American police officer asks a European police officer whether something is alright, and you believe that a European police officer will say to an American police officer that it is not? That is nonsense, since the police have to work with each other. One force cannot monitor the other. No legal system makes provision for one police force to monitor another police force. SWIFT as it stands does not therefore meet the demands of the European Parliament, as we have voted on here. You, too, should say something about that, and not just praise it to the skies, since that is simply not the truth.
Prime Minister, on the basis of your experience of the rotating Presidency, I believe that there is an institutional problem.
I believe that after six months... well, we will have to see after the next few Presidencies. I do not believe that the rotating Presidency and the permanent Presidency can function as Lisbon has defined the institutions. There is a real problem of dysfunctionality. We should have the clarity of mind to discuss this problem in the future."@en1
|
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples