Debates of the European Parliament 1
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
19-05-2010 EN Debates of the European Parliament 1 WEDNESDAY, 19 MAY 2010 IN THE CHAIR: MR BUZEK President 1. Opening of the sitting (The sitting was opened at 09.05) 2. Documents received: see Minutes 3. Outcome of the summit of 7 May 2010 and the ECOFIN meeting - What is the political relevance of the EU 2020 strategy in the context of the current financial and economic crisis? - Consequences of the financial and economic crisis on the EU 2020 strategy and its governance - What is the relevance of the EU 2020 strategy in the framework of the current financial and economic crisis? (debate) President. – The next item is: – the joint debate on mechanisms for strengthening economic order, – the Council and Commission statements: Outcome of the summit of 7 May 2010 and the ECOFIN meeting [2010/269(RSP)], – the oral question to the Council and the Commission: What is the political relevance of the EU 2020 strategy in the context of the current financial and economic crisis? (O-0052/2010 - B7-0213/2010), (O-0053/2010 - B7-0214/2010), – the oral question to the Council: Consequences of the financial and economic crisis for the EU 2020 strategy and its governance (O-0068/2010 - B7-0301/2010), – the oral question to the Council and the Commission: Political relevance of the EU 2020 strategy in the context of the current financial and economic crisis (O-0065/2010 - B7-0219/2010), (O-0066/2010 - B7-0220/2010). Diego López Garrido, President-in-Office of the Council. – (ES) Mr President, everyone is aware that we are living in a period of exceptional financial turbulence. This has been the case for a few months, and the origin does not go back a few months, but a few years, when the subprime crisis occurred in the United States. The origin was, therefore, a financial crisis in the private sector of the financial system, which rapidly became something that was affecting the real economy in the form of a deep depression, which, technically speaking, was a deep recession. This involved a decline in production and a significant increase in unemployment, which was particularly serious in those countries in which the property or residential construction sectors had a significant influence. There was an immediate reaction from the Member States and the central banks in order to prevent the financial system from collapsing, and there was also a reaction in relation to the real economy. This reaction, of course, had consequences for public economies and public finances. We are now no longer talking about private finances, but about public finances. Firstly, there was a crisis of financial stability in public accounts as a result of very marked deficits. There was also a crisis in sovereign bonds. This is what has been coming to the surface in recent months, encouraged by the actions of very volatile markets which, at times, have even been clearly speculative. These actions have also caused a significant rise in the interest that the markets require from the Member States when they are going to issue bonds. Moreover, this clearly affected the whole of the euro area, and therefore became a problem affecting not one, two or three countries, but the stability of the whole of the euro area. That is the situation. Those are all the events, or the diagnosis of the facts that the European Union has taken into account in order to react and act in response to this, and I feel that the EU has acted correctly throughout 2 EN Debates of the European Parliament 19-05-2010 this period. It may have appeared slow to take decisions. It may, at times, have seemed to be exasperatingly slow to take some decisions, but it has achieved the right results, the results of prudent action by the EU and, more importantly, coordinated action by the EU. Although it might appear that various measures prevent us from seeing the whole, I believe that the EU has established an appropriate strategy for the circumstances, which has to include some short-term measures and look more towards the medium and long term, as it is about preventing such a crisis from occurring again. As we have already said, the short-term measures involve an injection of public money and coordination by the European Union: what is known as the European Economic Recovery Plan, backed by the Commission; a plan that coordinates this immediate action, this shock treatment that the Member States are adopting in order to limit the damage done by this huge crisis, but not make it disappear. One manifestation of this short-term action is undoubtedly the aid to Greece, which had already been warned by the Commission months before about a difficult situation in its public accounts. The Council is making a series of recommendations to Greece in relation to Article 126(9) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, and the Council and the Commission are monitoring developments there. Not only are recommendations being given in relation to the liquidity of its public accounts, but also regarding structural reforms in the pensions system and the need to undertake reforms in the health system. Then came 23 April, when an action mechanism was adopted regarding Greece. Yesterday, this mechanism was manifested for the first time in funds being sent to Greece by EU countries through the system of this agreed mechanism. This is therefore the first expression of this short-term action, which is essential when a Member State is in serious difficulties, as is the case with Greece. Naturally, also in the short term – and this was expressed very clearly in the oral question put by Mr Daul, Mr Verhofstadt, Mr Schulz and others – we need to have a strategy to get us out of the crisis. It needs to be a measured, controlled strategy and, of course, it needs to be aimed at avoiding the very serious difficulties in public accounts, but it also needs to maintain the objective of growth. However, obviously a short-term strategy is not enough. We need to take medium and long-term measures. There are structural problems in the European economy; structural problems that were ultimately responsible for weakening Europe in the face of a highly volatile situation of extreme financial turbulence. The European Union is taking and suggesting measures in the medium and long term that it is important to point out. This is firstly the case because they are going to respond to the type of crisis that occurred as a result of this serious economic situation affecting the whole of the EU and, in particular, the euro area system. In order to be able to respond to the crisis in the financial sector, the European Union has planned a series of measures that are being debated in the next few days in Parliament: a supervision package, which I hope will be adopted as soon as possible. I also hope that the Council and Parliament will reach an agreement in this respect. As part of this package, or in relation to it, the Economic and Financial Affairs (Ecofin) Council adopted a measure yesterday: the regulation of hedge funds, alternative funds or high-risk funds. I refer here to the question by Mrs Harms and Mr Cohn-Bendit, who place a great deal of emphasis on this aspect. The perspective of action in the G20 also needs to be taken into account, also implementing what has been agreed in the G20. Likewise, we have said that the European Union has structural weaknesses and that structural reforms are needed. The Europe 2020 strategy aims to do this, and it is based on the commitment of the Member States to tackle certain objectives through a series of integrated guidelines. These guidelines are also going to be accompanied by national plans, which will be designed in what are known as the reform plans. It should also be said that, along with the Europe 2020 strategy, the action that the Commission is adopting in relation to the whole of the production system is also important. In its communication on 12 May, it proposed the coordination of economic policies. The Europe 2020 strategy is therefore a way of responding to the underlying problem in the productive economic system, preventing these fundamental weaknesses in the system in the future and making the Union’s economic system competitive and productive. It is also a way of aiming towards the objectives of technological added value, taking into account the social impact and therefore the need for specialisation in the labour market, employability and also combating climate change. 19-05-2010 EN Debates of the European Parliament 3 There is not, however, only a problem with the private financial system, with the productive structure, and essentially with the private sector: there is a problem with public accounts, which is also the focus of another aspect of the EU’s medium and long-term measures. These are the measures in the Commission’s proposal of 12 May, which the Ecofin Council began to debate yesterday and will continue to debate. These measures are aimed at maintaining budgetary discipline, guaranteeing compliance with the Stability and Growth Pact and establishing measures to resolve and prevent crises. With this in mind, a task force has been created, which is going to meet for the first time this Friday, 21 May, chaired by President Van Rompuy. Its objective is budgetary discipline and it will be using the Commission document on coordinating economic and budgetary policies presented by Commissioner Rehn. This relates to all the more long-term measures, in which we also need to include the debate that is beginning in the EU about tax on benefits in the financial sector and a tax that even the G20 is beginning to talk about, which is a tax on financial transactions, which is, in turn, being debated in the EU.