Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2012-06-13-Speech-3-092-000"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2012-06-13"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Preparation for the European Council meeting (28-29 June 2012) - Multiannual financial framework and own resources (debate)2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20120613.6.3-092-000"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2012-06-13-Speech-3-093-0002
lpv:speaker	lp:Janusz Lewandowski2
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, as a former Member of this House, I know what it means to speak when voting time is coming. Therefore, I will make only two short points. Firstly, a general one. We are all under the shadow of a crisis, but it should not overshadow the basic truths nor justify some unfounded points I could hear on the margins of this very good debate in Parliament. The European Union, which still holds a 20% share of world trade – with the share of Japan and the United States clearly declining – does not deserve the metaphor of a Titanic. We do face problems. They are not national. Therefore, a national answer is not enough. We should transform the emerging mantra of growth and jobs into reality by a more systemic response to banking and fiscal union, which is emerging, including through today’s votes in Parliament. My second short point concerns the multiannual framework, which is part of the solution, not part of the problem. I can illustrate this empirically with a credible paper from the UK Treasury indicating where taxpayers’ money is going. The UK middle-income taxpayer contributes GBP 28 to the European Union, which is the same as for the fire service. National debt interest servicing is GBP 363 rather than GBP 28. This is the problem. The European budget is not the answer to the problem, but could be part of the solution, via investment to act as a carrot via the Structural Funds – nobody denies this and it was also part of the anti-crisis resistance in my country of origin – with the stick of conditionality enforcing structural reforms. This part of the answer concerns own resources. Mr Zahradil was wrong. This is not about expanding the budget but about changing the proposal, fully respecting the fiscal autonomy and the sovereignty of the national parliaments. This is the design for the future: more Europe under the Lisbon Treaty with the same amount of money. I am happy to see Parliament’s resolution going in the same direction. Jutta Haug is right. ."@en1
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata	"(Applause)"1 "Einigkeit macht stark"1 "Janusz Lewandowski,"1 "Member of the Commission."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