Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2004-12-01-Speech-3-070"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20041201.11.3-070"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, Mr President-in-Office of the Council, ladies and gentlemen, we do indeed want the negotiations on the Financial Perspective and the European Union’s political priorities to produce agreement in good time, but we want an agreement that, at the same time, does justice to the demands that are made on the new and enlarged European Union. So let me tell you, as rapporteur for the temporary committee, that the quality of the agreement is also more important than the deadline.
Taking the discussions with Parliament’s specialist committees as our basis, we in the temporary committee are trying to define the political priorities for the years to come, and to put forward the upper limits for the structure of the European Budget, thereby laying down this House’s negotiating position ready for its discussions with the Council. By doing this, we want to guarantee that, on the one hand, of course, traditional policies will be no less important and, on the other, that the European Union will present itself better, both internally and externally, and finally become what the Constitutional Treaty defines it as being – a Union of citizens and states. That is why we are discussing among ourselves the political priorities on the basis of what value they add to Europe, and talking about how the European Budget can take greater account than hitherto of the Lisbon objectives, such as growth, employment and sustainability.
Mr President-in-Office of the Council, I see it as very important, in the light of past experience, that we should make it very clear that we want agreement to be reached in good time, thus preventing us from getting into difficulties – not so much with the Budget as with the legislative process. Let me say, though, that we could end up, in the course of the coming year, with a worst case scenario, and then we will all need to have safety nets at the ready, such as those provided for the Budget in the Treaties and the Regulations, namely Article 26 of the Inter-Institutional Agreement or Article 272 of the Treaty. At the same time, though, we will have to guarantee that, if the worst comes to the worst, it is made clear that the legal bases for structural funds and for multiannual programmes will also be extended if need be, that is to say, if there is no alternative. Perhaps the mere announcement of safety nets and alternatives of this kind and the fact that we are discussing them will help all the parties involved to become aware of their responsibilities and – with next year’s referendums in sight – will help to make it clear that we in the European institutions are willing and able to announce, at the right time, that we have succeeded in reaching agreement on the Financial Perspective.
I want to echo what was said by Mr Wynn, the first deputy chairman of the temporary committee. The issue of the Statement of Assurance is important, as is that of how we handle the financial regulation that has just entered into force, and these must, in this context, be sorted out alongside each other. This is not just about the upper limits, commitments and payment appropriations, but also about how the Commission, and also the Member States, manage the Budget as a whole. That is why we will also, in this context, have to discuss the Court of Auditors’ Statement of Assurance and the issue of the financial regulation, and also whether, at the end of the day, financial programming should be for seven years or for four. We will have to have in-depth discussions of these issues too.
It is vitally important that there should be guarantees of both a flexible and permanent trialogue whenever one is required, and, at the same time, of the informal and confidential conversations that we need to have if we are not to end up in a state of chaos at the end of the negotiations. That is what we would urge the Council to provide. Alongside this, we will also be addressing an oral question to the Commission in Strasbourg."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples