Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/1999-11-16-Speech-2-020"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.19991116.2.2-020"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, I would like to congratulate the rapporteur on her report. She has hit the nail on the head with her observation that at the Berlin Summit, political ideals and ambitions had to give way to a short-sighted bookkeeping mentality.
The European Union’s own resources have the feel of national contributions. This is why the discussion on the system of own resources is being dominated by a net mentality: who are the net payers of the European Union and who make the net profits? It will be clear that the economic benefits appeal to the individual Member States, to the detriment of values such as stability, solidarity and welfare in the long term.
It is regrettable that the net payers mainly focus on the revenue side of the budget. Consequently, a net mentality will mainly lead to missed chances. For example, the Netherlands has turned its back on the fund for refugees, a fund which, by the Netherlands own admission, it would benefit from disproportionately. But the Netherlands had prioritised “money back from Europe” over and above “value for money”.
The Berlin straitjacket means, above all, that Europe cannot realise its responsibilities. It leads to proposals in which Turkey, purely from financial motives, is offered a different political route of access. It leads to transitional periods which are far too long for the other candidate countries in terms of the environment, for fear that otherwise this, and I quote from the government document, “would lead to an increase in financial strain”.
Unexpected events – which are always to be expected – lead to unfortunate mishaps, to proposals where the reconstruction of Kosovo is at the expense of developing countries.
The Berlin Summit could also be dubbed the Summit of national exemption positions. Four countries were exempted from contributing to the United Kingdom’s exemption position. The rapporteur adopted a very wise viewpoint in this respect and has formulated a goal which I support, namely the abolition of all these exemption positions. The four countries which, rightly so, have rejected the British correction mechanism, should make an effort to rectify this situation.
In respect of levies, it has been proposed that the Member States can now retain 25% instead of 10%. Contrary to the rapporteur, I welcome this development, and I would even take it one step further. As far as I am concerned, Member States should be allowed to keep 100%, as long as we increase the rebate via the percentage of GNP. The GNP eminently reflects the economic development in Member States. It is, to my mind, therefore, the fairest instrument to distribute Europe’s financial responsibility over the Member States."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples