Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-12-16-Speech-2-004"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20031216.1.2-004"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"The next item is the joint debate on:
As regards the Intergovernmental Conference we will have a debate today on the wider questions and I look forward to being guided by that debate and our resolution. When I spoke at the Intergovernmental Conference, I raised two specific concerns of a parliamentary nature.
The first concern was on the financing of the European Union and its budget procedure. I pointed out in the clearest terms that the European Parliament supports the balanced outcome of the Convention as regards the different institutions and their roles in budget-making. I explained what that Convention procedure was and what its balances amounted to.
I explained that the European Parliament wholly rejects the interference by Ecofin as an undue, unwarranted and unacceptable interference in the budget process.
I explained that not only was Ecofin an attack on the conclusions of the Convention, but even on the budgetary treaty of 1975, and that in institutional terms it in fact represented a step backwards.
I pointed out that through that period Parliament has exercised considerable restraint on spending. The House will be interested to know, because it is the product of our collective work, that we have 15 years of budget-making experience since we signed an interinstitutional agreement with the Council on financial perspectives in 1988. In that period, by discretionary additions in the aggregate, the Council added EUR 33 billion of discretionary expenditure. Parliament, under its discretion, added EUR 21 million. If there is a relative tendency to stretch the budget, it is found more in the Council than Parliament, and Parliament should not be the object of the presumption that if it gets responsibility it fails to act responsibly.
The final point I made for Parliament regarding the Intergovernmental Conference and Parliament was to invite the IGC to ensure that Parliament should not be used as some kind of last-minute bargaining chip, where the numbers of Members in this House would increase regardless of our ability to be effective. We are not some kind of globalised rubber-stamp congress of the peoples of Europe; we have serious budgetary and legislative functions. There must be an upper limit on our size, and we must respect the principles enshrined in the work of the Convention to cope with who gets how many seats. These were the points I made on behalf of this House to the IGC.
Finally, with regard to the outcome of last weekend, there is no doubt that the failure to agree in the IGC represents a setback. However, that setback is not necessarily a calamity. If agreement was not possible last weekend, it does not make agreement less necessary. It shows the immensity of the challenge we have undertaken together. Last weekend, although the key players arrived, a collective spirit and a will to settle were absent. That absence is something for which we paid a price, and that absence of a spirit of compromise on the part of all key players needs to be explored.
The European Council report and Commission statement European Council (Brussels, 12 and 13 December 2003);
Together with the leaders of the Groups, I would like to carry from this House a clear set of messages from today's debate to the incoming Irish presidency. I look forward to this debate and to what messages you, as the European Parliament, believe we should give to the incoming presidency regarding the next phase of play.
I should like to welcome this morning the President-in-Office of the Council, Mr Berlusconi, and to say to him and his colleagues, Mr Frattini, Mr Antonione and Mr Buttiglione, how welcome they are. I should like to say again in Mr Berlusconi's presence that in the course of the ordinary work of the presidency, work with our committees, legislative work and contact with Parliament, we have enjoyed very good, positive relations with the Italian presidency.
Council and Commission statements
Meeting of Heads of State or Government on the IGC (Brussels, 12 and 13 December 2003);
Statement by the President-in-Office of the Council The work of the Italian presidency.
I should like at the outset to profit from this moment to share with you a brief report of the summit meeting and the IGC from the perspective of those questions which I raised on behalf of this House so that before we go into our debate proper you will have been informed of what we had to say.
I am bound to say that, as regards the work that was done at the European Council meeting, a very high volume of business was transacted in a short period of time and considerable progress made in quite a number of areas. Indeed it is worth placing on the record that we in this House enjoyed in those terms a very positive engagement with the Italian presidency in working across our committees on many different areas.
In particular and following the recent resolutions of the House I welcomed the conclusions on EU-transatlantic relations, but I made the point that it is precisely in a phase of deepening transatlantic relations, which is the objective of the conclusions, that our candid friendship with the United States should not exclude our candid concerns about Guantanamo Bay. I spoke on behalf of the House in those terms.
With regard to the Kyoto Protocol, I recalled that as we were meeting there was a UN-sponsored meeting in Milan. It seems that Russia still has an open mind on whether to sign the Kyoto Protocol. We Europeans have a strong interest that the Russians should do so and therefore make it effective. I believe the Commission and the incoming presidency should take clear initiatives to ensure that in the months to come we who believe in Kyoto should seek to bring it to a satisfactory definition by deepening our contact with Russia, and I made that point also this weekend."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in one triple:
{ lp_eu:2003-12-16_AgendaItem_1, dcterms:hasPart, lp_eu:2003-12-16-Speech-2-004 }