Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/1999-12-14-Speech-2-208"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.19991214.9.2-208"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, the budgetary discussion this year has been so strange that, even during the time which has passed between the speech by the general rapporteur, at the beginning of the debate, and my own intervention, the following have taken place, in chronological order: an informal meeting of the Committee on Budgets, a meeting of the budgetary Council and a meeting of the political groups.
This is happening because the interinstitutional negotiation has been very bad. We have debated the ancillary clauses while the Council was delaying the basic decisions. And now, when there is hardly any time left, we are negotiating with the clock stopped.
In May, this Parliament experienced a serious confrontation between those of us who wanted Agenda 2000 and the Berlin financial perspectives, and those who, for budgetary reasons and for reasons of domestic politics, did not want the agreement. In the end we approved it by a simple majority. But there was still Kosovo and a Council statement which contained a commitment to review the financial perspectives in category 4 for extraordinary reasons. A war in Europe is always an extraordinary reason, the most extraordinary of all reasons to justify a partial review of the financial perspectives. In this discussion Parliament has been more up to the job than the Council.
I am sure that the recourse to Article 272 was excessive, and would even have been counter-productive if it had been brought into effect. But it is also true that it is the extraordinary rigidity of the Council in negotiation which has led us to take this action.
Finally, and simply, under the pressure of having to confront a high level of payments, the Council has performed a U-turn and now accepts what the Parliament requested in the first reading.
Would it not have been simpler to accept these requests by Parliament beforehand and to have prevented all this last-minute panic, which does absolutely nothing for the serious and efficient image which the European institutions are supposed to have?
I welcome this agreement and this commitment. Parliament is going to finance all its political priorities, including the fisheries agreement with Morocco, which is of prime economic interest to my country, Spain. But make no mistake: the commitment which we have all made is very serious and a disagreement on the part of the Council would have disastrous consequences not only for interinstitutional confidence but also for the 2001 budgetary procedure.
It is up to you, Council, to see to it that this does not happen, and remember that not even those of us who defended, defend and will defend the Berlin financial perspectives, could accept the ceiling on external actions not being raised, if the figures require it, in April of next year."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples