Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-07-05-Speech-3-050"

PredicateValue (sorted: default)
rdf:type
dcterms:Date
dcterms:Is Part Of
dcterms:Language
lpv:document identification number
"en.20000705.3.3-050"2
lpv:hasSubsequent
lpv:speaker
lpv:spokenAs
lpv:translated text
". Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, we all know that the European public’s need for information is still very great, although monetary union is already in place and euro banknotes and coins will come into circulation before too very long. There are less than 75 weeks to go in fact. The Committee on Budgets, in common with all Members of this House, is very much in agreement with the objectives described in the Commission communication on the communication strategy covering the final stages of the completion of EMU. We also believe that there should be incentives and support for companies, especially SMEs, to enable them to carry out the work needed to change over to the euro. Furthermore, enhanced preparation is just as desirable and important for all our citizens and for all consumers. We all need to change over to the euro in our daily lives. It was not of course for the Committee on Budgets to assess the content of the Commission communication in detail: we limited ourselves to budgetary aspects. We wish to point out once again that in the interinstitutional agreement it was stipulated that information policy is an autonomous action which does not require a separate legal basis. For the reason mentioned, this particularly needs to be brought to the attention of the Council again. However, I would particularly like to remind you that the Prince programme was initiated by Parliament through budgetary intervention in 1996 with the clear aim of financing information campaigns on priority issues for the EU. This was to take place at interinstitutional level, as at that time we were convinced, as we are now, that this would ensure that the available funding would be spent as effectively as possible. We therefore wish to stress once again that the decision on the breakdown of appropriations and the guidelines for implementation, including joint actions, is taken on the basis of the opinion given by the interinstitutional working group. This working group was specifically referred to in the budgetary remarks, and that is how it should stay – and that comment is particularly for the ears of the Commission! For that reason we wish to reinsert the relevant remark on budget headings B3-300 and B3-306, which the Commission evidently ‘forgot’ to include in its preliminary draft budget for 2001. I would like to thank the rapporteur and the committee responsible for including our remarks on this in the conclusions."@en1
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata

Named graphs describing this resource:

1http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/English.ttl.gz
2http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/Events_and_structure.ttl.gz
3http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/spokenAs.ttl.gz

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph