Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2004-12-15-Speech-3-269"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20041215.8.3-269"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
".
The Council notes that increasing overall expenditure on research is indeed a central element in the Lisbon strategy and one of the keys to making the EU more competitive in the global economy.
The Council and Member States have repeatedly committed themselves to achieving average research and development expenditure of 3% of GDP by 2010. The recent Kok report once again highlighted the need to make good the under-performance in relation to this target.
Notwithstanding this general statement, the Council does not share the honourable Member's view that it is the Stability and Growth Pact which is preventing Member States from achieving the Lisbon objective. Perhaps more fundamentally, the Stability and Growth Pact should be used as a tool to encourage national expenditure on individual budget components over and above others.
Firstly, it is clearly possible to fund research while respecting the Pact. This is a very important point that leads on to the second point that the Pact is not the factor limiting investment in research. Research funding is rather a matter of national priorities.
Thirdly, I would note that the level of R[amp]D expenditure is not solely dependent on public finance. The target covers privately-funded R[amp]D as well, which can be encouraged by a number of means in addition to public expenditure. The key to reaching the 3% target is the two thirds of R[amp]D spending that should be privately funded, not the one third that should come from public funds.
Finally, I would like to recall that the Pact is a framework for the management of budgetary policies at global level, with a view to ensuring the sustainability of public finances over the longer term. All expenditure has to be paid for, even if in the longer run we would hope that investment would have positive returns. When the Ecofin Council discussed the Pact on 16 November 2004 and this precise issue was raised, there was a broad majority of Member States against pursing the possibility suggested by the Member and excluding certain categories of expenditure from deficit calculations.
In the analytical assessment of the reasons for an excessive deficit, the Council will always take into account the type of expenditure and the likely long-term impact. But the Council does not share the honourable Member's assessment regarding the exclusion of R[amp]D expenditure from deficit calculations."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples