Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2011-06-08-Speech-3-501-750"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2011-06-08"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Explanations of vote2
dcterms:Language	"sv"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20110608.20.3-501-750"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2011-06-08-Speech-3-501-8752
lpv:speaker	lp:Gunnar Hökmark2
lpv:spokenAs	substitute; Delegation to the Euronest Parliamentary Assembly (2009-09-16--2014-06-30)3 member; Special committee on the policy challenges and budgetary resources for a sustainable European Union after 2013 (2010-06-17--2011-06-30)3 substitute; Delegation to the EU-Armenia, EU-Azerbaijan and EU-Georgia Parliamentary Cooperation Committees (2009-09-16--2014-06-30)3 unknown; Moderata Samlingspartiet (2009-07-14--2014-06-30)3 chair; Delegation to the EU-Croatia Joint Parliamentary Committee (2009-09-17--2013-06-30)3 member; Delegation for relations with Belarus (2011-05-09--2014-06-30)3 substitute; ITRE (2009-07-16--2012-01-18)3 member; Special Committee on the Financial, Economic and Social Crisis (2009-10-08--2011-07-31)3 member; Conference of Delegation Chairs (2009-09-17--2013-06-30)3 vice-chair; EPP (2009-11-25--2014-06-30)3 member; ECON (2009-07-16--2012-01-18)3
lpv:translated text	"In the vote on the report on the EU’s long-term budget in Strasbourg on 8 June 2011, we Swedish Conservatives in the European Parliament chose to vote against the proposal. This was because the proposal does not set priorities for important and less important expenditure, which we consider to be necessary. Instead of showing leadership and focusing on what will bring growth and competitiveness to Europe, the proposal calls for an increase in the budget of 5% so as to avoid the need to prioritise. At a time when the EU Member States are fighting massive budget deficits and growing national debt, the European Parliament is choosing to demand more money for the EU. This is a line that we cannot support. We should instead phase out the subsidies for the common agricultural policy (CAP) and the Structural Funds, but unfortunately, the proposal that was voted through goes in the opposite direction. While we voted against the report as a whole, we welcome the wording in the proposal concerning a ‘significant increase’ in appropriations for science and research. This is something that we have worked hard for and its inclusion is a step in the right direction."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph