Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-10-24-Speech-2-233"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20001024.7.2-233"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, Commissioner, I would like to start by congratulating the rapporteur. Along with other speakers, I have the impression that this year’s budget is particularly complex. Some sections of the budget are difficult to implement. I therefore believe that, in principle, we ought to support the Commission proposals for revising their staffing policy. I, however, will vote in favour of the so-called performance reserve, for I believe that it is necessary that, at this stage, we obtain some more information, and in my view, that information should detail the conditions of early retirement and the consequences for staffing levels if some time in 2004, or maybe earlier in 2003, we will be recruiting officials from Central and Eastern European countries. Finally, I also endorse the observation made in the Haug resolution that we need to pay bills on time as soon as possible, because the Commission will not come out smelling of roses if this situation continues for much longer.
I would also like to say a few things about agriculture. In my opinion, the Commission has put up a poor show and the Council has compounded the situation by beating the Commission down on its agricultural expenditure schedule right at the start of this year in the Council meeting of July of this year. We agreed on an ad-hoc procedure a few years ago which stipulated that we would determine agricultural expenditure more or less at the end of October in the
and yes, that is the long and short of it. It escapes me how the Commission can give this estimate as early as February and the Council in July. It amounts to no more than a stab in the dark and I believe that, if we agree on a set amount and if there is an added amount in Berlin, we should also try to fulfil that agreement.
The main point of discussion is category 4. How can we finance emergency aid for the Balkans? I am in favour of it. I believe we ought to do something in Serbia and the western Balkans as a matter of urgency. The key question is, of course, how to finance this? I am not a fan of artificially increasing certain budget lines so that we subsequently have to say that we need to exceed the financial perspective. I would prefer us to first of all try to find the funds within the financial perspective. If necessary, we could always look further afield, but at this stage, I have no reason to assume this.
I would like to say a few words about the budget implementation. I wanted to make two points, in particular. I have just received a letter today from the Commissioner on the implementation of the SOS helpline, which, sadly, is desperately needed in Europe. The Commission does not label this as information policy, but social policy. Seen in this light, it does not belong in a line as voted by Parliament. I would question that, for I think that it is just as much information policy as it is social policy, and I therefore hope to return to this topic within the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development shortly.
The second point I wanted to make concerns quality policy for agricultural products, for which Parliament earmarked 50 million of the budget last year. This has never been more topical. The Commission made very little effort to implement this policy, which is deplorable."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
"lettre rectificative"1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples