Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-12-19-Speech-4-064"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20021219.3.4-064"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
The EU's Budget procedure is becoming a set ritual every year. Parliament wants to spend more money than the European Commission is proposing, but the Council guards the Member States’ purses by wanting to spend less. The result is an ever-increasing disparity between the expenditure ceiling agreed in 1998 and actual spending. As a representative of the Socialist Party in the Netherlands, I am faced with two choices each time. My party defends the maintaining or increasing of government expenditure intended for better public services, a better living environment and more solidarity with people in the poor parts of the world. It goes without saying that this will entail higher taxation levels than the governing neo-liberal politicians want. These taxes have to be collected from the top earners and from companies. However, accepting higher spending and higher taxes does not mean that we are happy to spend a great deal more money on an unnecessarily centralised EU. We regard part of the EU’s expenditure as a waste that only goes to support bureaucracy and megalomania. Even the structural funds and the common agricultural policy, which could deliver benefits for poor regions and small farmers, are sometimes spent on the wrong things. The only points on which I can support the increase in the budget proposed by the GUE/NGL Group are those relating to social funds, the Northern Ireland peace fund and cohesion funds."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples