Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-07-02-Speech-2-012"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20020702.1.2-012"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, honourable Members, as Mr Färm has underlined, the purpose of this debate is to prepare the joint sitting of Parliament, Council and Commission prior to the Council's first reading of the 2003 Budget. Its primary concern will be with agriculture and fisheries, but funds for the Common Foreign and Security Policy and administrative expenditure will also have a large part in the proceedings.
Let me say something about the appropriations as a whole. Mr Färm had also addressed the question of whether an understanding might already be reached on these. I take the view that it is too early in the day to do this, and that this is due to issues of agricultural policy and, not least, the importance of the euro/US dollar exchange rate for the area of appropriations in general. Appropriations also, of course, require that as definite a basis as possible be available for the purposes of forecasting. This means that more information about the implementation of the 2002 Budget is needed, and this we will, of course, have as the budget year takes its course. Your report, Mr Podestà, is concerned with better forecasting for the necessary appropriations and with the resultant improvement in harmonisation with the implementation plans for the current Budget year.
Whilst being very grateful for your report, I do think there needs to be more in-depth discussion in the Committee on Budgets on what we are actually aiming at. At European level, we have a Budget made up of commitments, which means that there are always commitments outstanding. The commitments still outstanding are not to be equated with late payment. Let me put it this way. The greater part of European funds is spent on infrastructure and investments. Investments cannot be made in the same year as the commitments are entered into. To take the trans-European networks as an example, if commitments in this area always had to be implemented within a year, studies could be carried out, but the actual projects would not be able to be co-financed. That is why commitments are always building up in this area. What is of course important is that the dormant or abnormal commitments should be reduced, and I believe that progress has been made on this in the foreign policy area. Far greater use was made of last year's foreign policy appropriations than had previously been the case.
Administrative expenditure is an important case in point, having featured in all previous debates on the 2003 Budget year. The difficulty is that the financial programming allocated no funds to preparing the institutions for enlargement, even though it is agreed that the institutions have to take steps at least six months prior to the actual date of enlargement in order for their administrative systems to be ready for it. In the preliminary draft of the Budget, the Commission had set aside an amount to cover these measures both in the Commission and in the other institutions. Now, in view of the first reading, the Council has prepared a resolution that the Commission absolutely cannot support. The position is that the Council wants to award itself an increase of 7% for administrative expenditure, and, if certain measures – such as, for example, the cost of translating the
are added, the Council is proposing a rate of increase for itself of 12% over the Budget year 2003 and is financing it by cutting the Commission's own rate of increase. Such a proposal is extremely unfair, and the Commission will not accept it. So I hope that an understanding can be reached about this in the conciliation procedure, with the result that this point will initially be left open, also allowing consideration of Parliament's proposals, which are interesting. At present, however, the Commission sees itself as having no option but to prepare to mobilise the flexibility instrument.
Just a few words on the Supplementary and Amending Budget No 3. I thank Mrs Buitenweg and Mr Podestà for agreeing to the proposal. This means that the entire surplus is injected into the 2002 Budget, and, above all, posts are created which the Economic and Social Committee needs in order to take on the functions devolving on it from August onwards in consequence of the expiry of the ECSC Treaty. The Council cannot hear me now, but I had the opportunity to say in Denmark yesterday what I am saying to you – that I hope that the Council, in the course of the conciliation procedure, will be open to Parliament's arguments, as the mood and openness of the conciliation procedure leave their mark on the general atmosphere in which Budget discussions are conducted and on the course that they take.
In agriculture, the Commission preliminary draft of EUR 2 billion is below the upper limit. I would like to reiterate that this is, of course, a very good thing in principle, as there must, in agriculture, always be leeway to take account of unforeseen eventualities.
I am grateful to Mr Färm for the report on the 2003 Budget in view of the conciliation procedure. In it, you make the critical observation that, if another letter of amendment on agriculture is to be submitted in the autumn, then that might perhaps be brought forward. All our experience of agriculture, in particular, leads us to say that autumn is a much better time than the first half of the year for making predictions as to how much will be required in a year, as overall expenditure is dependent to a very great degree on what happens in the summer months. That can be taken into account in the autumn.
I would also like to refer to the marked change in the euro/US dollar exchange rate in relation to the Commission's preliminary draft, in which we had assumed an exchange rate of 88 cents to the euro. Now, of course, that has seen a great deal of movement over recent weeks, meaning that the margin in heading 1 for agriculture has already been reduced by between EUR 400 million and EUR 500 million. Changes to date in the euro/US dollar exchange rate are thus causing an increase in expenditure of between EUR 400 million and EUR 500 million.
I should, perhaps, briefly mention veterinary expenditure, as there has been criticism of their reduction in the Commission proposal. It is particularly in the veterinary field that the budgetary impact is contingent upon unforeseen eventualities, be they illnesses or epidemics. That is why there has to be a margin available. This line would then be replenished where appropriate.
The autumn will also see the submission of a document on the adaptation of the fisheries agreement. Let me now again point out – with reference not to category 4, but to fisheries as a whole – that the Commission will now also be putting forward a proposal on reform of the fisheries policy, one that will add EUR 32 million to the Budget heading; these are intended for a programme of enquiries and related measures, so that the fisheries policy – especially as regards fleet reduction – will require a total of EUR 59 million from the flexibility reserve.
Let me briefly mention the Common Foreign and Security Policy. I am grateful to Parliament for welcoming the increase in funds specifically for the police mission in Bosnia, which is to begin in the course of this year.
I would, though, also like to come to an understanding in the course of the conciliation procedure as regards how decisions may be taken in future to achieve greater financial security. The Commission had indeed put forward a proposal for a specific flexibility reserve, with which the Council found itself unable to agree. I will observe that Parliament prefers what I would describe as the second best proposal and thus goes along with increased use of the emergency reserve for crisis management tasks of this kind. Perhaps we can come to some agreement about this in the course of the conciliation procedure.
I shall deal very briefly with foreign policy, with regard to which I am already able to announce that the Commission is preparing to use this year's Supplementary and Amending Budget No 4 to top up the margin of EUR 70 million, which is still there for foreign policy. Last year, Parliament and the Council left this amount in the margin, stating that it should be used only when more precise information on a programme for Afghanistan became available. All this will be put before you shortly."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples