Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-04-09-Speech-2-047"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2002-04-09"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:2000 discharges2
dcterms:Language	"nl"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20020409.3.2-047"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2002-04-09-Speech-2-0482
lpv:speaker	lp:Rijk van Dam2
lpv:spokenAs	member; EDD (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 vice-chair; Committee on Regional Policy, Transport and Tourism (2002-01-21--2004-07-19)3 unknown; ChristenUnie - Staatkundig Gereformeerde Parti (2002-03-18--2004-07-19)3 member; Delegation for relations with the countries of South Asia and the South Asia Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) (2002-02-07--2004-07-19)3 substitute; Temporary committee on foot and mouth disease (2002-01-17--2002-12-17)3 member; Delegation for relations with Israel (2002-02-07--2004-07-19)3 substitute; Committee on Legal Affairs and the Internal Market (2002-01-17--2002-06-30)3 substitute; CONT (2002-01-17--2003-01-28)3 substitute; BUDG (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, the enormous budget surplus in 2000 to the tune of EUR 11.6 billion illustrates that budgetary management still leaves something to be desired. In the Structural Funds, under spending is even starting to have structural implications. In our view, unspent amounts should be returned to the Member States, at least after two years. This could help these Member States reduce their national debt, for example. We therefore support Amendment No 9 tabled by Mr Heaton-Harris. The management of the Structural Funds requires substantial improvement. The complex Community regulations must be simplified. Coordination between the Commission and the Member States is well below par. Financial inspection is riddled with loopholes, both ex-ante and ex-post. The current financial correction system must also be changed as a matter of urgency, because it encourages Member States to cover up irregularities and fraud instead of reporting dirty tricks. We have known this for years, but the Commission and the Member States are still doing much too little to improve the situation. We are disappointed that the pre-accession aid programmes are not achieving their objectives by a long chalk. The findings in the special report drawn up by the Court of Auditors are disturbing. The fact that it is unlikely that the candidate countries will be able to implement the various aid programmes during this calendar year is unacceptable to us. I would ask the Commission to inform us of the present state of affairs. The reform of the European Commission which was initiated in 1999 is still not evident in terms of specific results in 2000. I trust that the Commissioner will now have some insight into the results achieved over the course of 2001. We would be interested to find out whether she would be prepared to share some of the information. There is also considerable under spending in aid programmes for development cooperation. Duplication with Member States’ policies may be partly to blame for this. Would the Commission map this out for us soon? In our view, the subsidiarity principle should be taken seriously in EU development policy. Finally, I have made the shocking discovery that each part-session in Strasbourg costs approximately EUR 11.5 million extra per week, quite apart from the environmental pollution they cause. This Parliament is forced into this situation solely in order to honour the wish of one Member State. It would therefore be fair if this Member State were to reimburse this House to the amount of the total estimated annual additional costs of EUR 138 million."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph