Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-10-24-Speech-2-207"
|Predicate||Value (sorted: default)|
|dcterms:Is Part Of|
|lpv:document identification number||
"Mr President, at this crucial stage of work on the 2007 budget, it seems to me that the European Parliament is taking more account than the Council of the priorities, figures and principles of interinstitutional cooperation agreed for the period of the 2007-2013 multiannual Financial Perspective. As people elected by the people, we have a good understanding of the concern felt in the Member States. There is concern that the new generation of multiannual programmes might not begin on time. That will be one of the main criteria against which the year 2007 will be assessed. We also share a common desire for a new financial regulation, hence our pressure on the Finnish Presidency to ensure that we can work on the basis of the new financial regulation in 2007. The oft-repeated refrain that we are striving to rationalise the budget will become more than mere words this year. Mr Elles, our rapporteur, has proposed, and obtained Parliament’s support for, a very consistent position. This entails giving strong financial support to the priority lines, whilst applying a 30% reserve to budget lines that seem unlikely to be used in full. We should all sing from the same hymn sheet in this matter. There is certain to be a difference of opinion, however, on the issue of posts and salaries in administration. We believe that the European Union’s new functions require motivation, a stable administrative staff and recruitment from the new Member States. There is bound to be disagreement amongst us on this issue during the conciliation procedure in November. Personally, I am not fully satisfied with the geographical focus, as our main commitment is to the continent of Europe. The larger the European Union, the greater its responsibility for Europe. This should be reflected in the geographical focus applied to the distribution of funds. Nonetheless, the margins are retained and the flexibility instrument remains unused. It should also be possible to reach a compromise this year, and our argument should be the strength of Thursday’s vote in the European Parliament."@en1
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples