Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2010-03-08-Speech-1-148"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2010-03-08"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Taxation of financial transactions (debate)2
dcterms:Language	"pt"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20100308.17.1-148"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2010-03-08-Speech-1-1492
lpv:speaker	lp:Miguel Portas2
lpv:spokenAs	member_of_the_bureau; EUL/NGL (2009-07-14--2012-01-22)3 member; Delegation for relations with the Maghreb countries and the Arab Maghreb Union (2009-09-16--2012-04-24)3 substitute; Delegation for relations with Iran (2009-09-16--2012-04-24)3 vice-chair; Special Committee on the Financial, Economic and Social Crisis (2009-10-15--2011-07-31)3 substitute; Delegation for relations with the Mashreq countries (2009-09-16--2012-04-24)3 substitute; ECON (2009-07-16--2012-01-18)3 unknown; Bloco de Esquerda (2009-07-14--2012-04-24)3 member; BUDG (2009-07-16--2012-01-18)3 member; Delegation for relations with Iraq (2009-09-16--2012-04-24)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, I believe that the technical discussion in which we must engage is undoubtedly very important, but it must not hide the fact that the choice facing us is of a political nature. Therefore, conducting and building the whole argument on a technical basis to avoid having to make the political choice is somewhat lacking in legitimacy. Mr Haglund, for example, explained that if we had the Tobin Tax in place, we would not have avoided the financial crisis. I can agree with him, but we would certainly have a lot more resources to fight the effects of the financial crisis in our economies and on the most disadvantaged sectors of the European population. This, therefore, is the issue at stake here. And the second aspect concerns ... and this is why Commissioner Šemeta’s answer did not convince me at all, either in terms of the schedules, or in terms of the basic issue. Ultimately, what Commissioner Šemeta is telling us, as well as Mr Gauzès, is that the tax is an appealing and very interesting idea, but that we cannot apply it on a European scale. It must be worldwide. Let us be clear. Saying this is saying to people that the Tobin Tax will never exist on a global scale. Therefore, there is no point in deceiving people here. What is being said is that either it is global or it is not going to exist. What is being said, therefore, is that it is not going to exist. I have an entirely different view. I believe that the European Union is a sufficiently strong financial market for a general residual tax on all transactions to be created without capital flight. However, above all, we would be telling our citizens something absolutely decisive: that, in this crisis, at least on a residual level, the financial capital that led us into the crisis, at least on a residual level, must pay. And that this was essentially and specifically intended to fight global hunger and poverty and to begin financing the establishment of a social pillar in the European project, the pillar that we are missing and that we do not have. Citizens would understand this very well."@en1
lpv:videoURI	<go to Events_and_structure europarl>2

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph