Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-04-09-Speech-3-095"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20030409.4.3-095"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
The European Parliament recently played a part in a ridiculous psychodrama. I would remind the House of my speech and my explanation of vote on 26 and 27 March. A stop has now been put to this, as was only sensible. Nonetheless, it involved a joint declaration with the Council, in which the latter accepts the idea of codecision for the adoption of future financial perspectives. Further, it takes advantage of the opportunity to place financial aid to Turkey in the ‘pre-accession’ heading.
We do not agree with any of these points. I therefore voted against the Böge report.
I would also like to emphasise that enlargement should call for a major financial review. Structural Funds should be done away with in the interests of economy. Each country should regain control of its town and country planning. Only part of this finance would be retained. This would be for the benefit of new Member States only and for a limited time, with a view to assisting them to reach the standard required.
This is precisely what the British Government has just wisely proposed at the Convention. We have actually been arguing along these lines for some time. I refer the House to the White Paper published by the UEN Group in 1997 assessing the value of a Europe of the nations as against a welfare-state Europe."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples