Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2011-10-27-Speech-4-061-000"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20111027.6.4-061-000"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, I share the same feeling of relief described by Mr Verhofstadt, although I must say that it almost comes as a relief when anything at all is agreed on following the now familiar crisis summits. Before you offer us your explanation of how the Euro Area Summit will assume responsibility for economic governance in the future, I must point out that I still see no evidence of an analysis of the failure on your side. Nor have I heard that the Heads of State or Government once told Greece that the programmes they had agreed over the course of the last year had actually driven Greece more deeply into crisis.
My sceptical analysis does not just apply to the developments we have seen in recent months. At this point I would like once again to explain my scepticism with regard to what was agreed yesterday and finalised last night. If things do not work out as well as outlined at present, then people should not simply shrug and say that no one could have foreseen such a turn of events. It is my belief – in relation to capitalisation – that you have not yet abandoned this pattern of deciding too little, that the haircut is not sufficient and that the processes are too slow.
In relation to Greece, we heard last week from the Troika that the haircut should be around 60%. You really need to explain why a figure of 50% has been chosen. You also need to explain why you believe that creditors, who are finally to be asked to shoulder a greater share of the burden, will implement this 50% figure, given the fact that they have not yet implemented the 21% haircut voluntarily agreed in July. I am still at a loss to know from where this hope comes.
My second point concerns the recapitalisation that is needed for the banks. I believe we can all quickly agree that this is a process that does not deserve particular confidence. At the very least, the process will be too slow. I daresay that the Dexia problem will not prove to be a unique case and that other scenarios similar to Dexia’s will be encountered.
With regard to the EFSF lever that provided the focus for debate prior to the summit in Germany, I am astonished at the confidence of the Council of the Euro Group in expecting the markets to use the levers they agreed in a constructive way. I believe that it is a very slim hope that the markets will suddenly start to operate in a constructive manner. I also fail to understand why we now intend limiting the capital for the EFSF to 1 billion, even though we were actually certain that 2 billion would be needed.
What you have completely ignored so far is the fact that the economic figures of the European Union are negative overall. Even in Germany, economic growth is starting to slip. The prospects for a stimulus programme for sustained development in the European economy, particularly in the countries that are in deficit, have been very limited to date. This is once again demonstrated by the fact that you continue to emphasise the need for austerity, failing to mention the revenue side at all. Mr Schulz has said quite enough already about the major problem of tax evasion. This is something where you have still failed to take a genuinely consistent line.
I began with a vehement criticism of the ability of the summit led by you, Mr Van Rompuy, to function properly. It is also evident that, despite the glimpse into the profound abyss afforded us by the Troika and the markets in recent weeks, you are still failing to act with consistency, that more and more crisis meetings are required, and that not enough is being decided in the end. It is for this reason that I share the opinion of those who say that, in the light of the Euro Area Summit chaired by you, it is quite inconceivable that economic governance can work with meetings to be held at six-monthly intervals. In view of what we have experienced in the last year, I believe that this is almost like a threat. I believe that we are making more progress in the debate regarding the strengthening of powers, including those of Mr Rehn, something the Council has resisted so far. We cannot continue to play politics in this crisis with this non-transparent Euro Area Summit, undemocratic procedures, and a strategy of telling our citizens half-truths."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata | |
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples