Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2010-11-23-Speech-2-443"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20101123.37.2-443"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, I am concerned, but not about the budget, the interinstitutional agreement or a possible twelve-part budget. I have a general concern about the political situation facing the European Union, which has come to light today in the context of the budget. I am concerned about the trend for intergovernmental cooperation and about the fact that the increased powers of Parliament are obviously going to be curtailed and that even the agreement made in 2006 is not being respected. I am concerned that the Treaty of Lisbon is not being put into effect.
Mr Barroso, I welcome your statements. However, perhaps it would have been more helpful if you had come 10 days earlier, to make it clearer that the Commission is on Parliament’s side.
With regard to the three main subjects of our negotiations, the first one that I would like to discuss is the flexibility instrument. There has obviously been some movement in this area. However, I have recently heard that there have been setbacks during the parallel negotiations in Brussels. What is happening there? Is there a possibility, and is this too much to ask, of agreeing on the same level of flexibility that we had before the Treaty of Lisbon, which was the right solution and which was achieved after many years of negotiations, starting with the Agenda 2000? Is it too much to ask in the case of own resources to commit to the continuation of what we – the Council, the Commission and Parliament – said in 2006 in our statement on the interinstitutional agreement? Is it too much to ask that those people who are rejecting the idea of a debate on own resources should try reading the treaty? The treaty states that this debate must take place.
Lastly, Mr President, is it too much to ask for us to enter into binding political agreements on all the issues relating to assent procedures so that we can prevent crises from occurring and so that we do not find ourselves in the same position on other questions, including external trade agreements and the next multiannual financial framework? If you present these things in the form that you have today, the answer from this House will be a definite ‘no’."@en1
|
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples