Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2004-12-01-Speech-3-098"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20041201.11.3-098"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
I should like to thank all the Members of this House for the remarks and specific questions they have put to me. Let me start by responding to the issue of the timing, the timeframe and planning which we in the Council follow and has been questioned by some of you, first of all by Mr Böge, but subsequently also by Mrs Schroedter and Mr Hatzidakis. The latter two also spoke about rumours and indications that the timeframe which I gave you a moment ago would have been altered. Reference was made to a summit and to other rumours. I can put your minds at rest. There is only one timeframe and it is the one I presented to you. It mainly comes down to the fact that indeed, it is our plan and intention to achieve agreement in the Council by June 2005. I can add to this that I agree with what Mr Böge said about the continued non-appearance of the Statement of Assurance from the Court of Auditors. He knows, as you do, that we in the Council share Parliament’s concern about this. Some of you, including Mr Galeote Quecedo, have enquired after the precise state of affairs in connection with the timing and the schedule. The state of affairs is that the preparations for the Council of 17 December are now underway and that we will then do as agreed. That means that we then hope to take a decision about the principles and guidelines for the financial perspectives, as well as the package, the survey of what we have achieved by means of the building-block approach. That is what is before the Council and it is hoped that we can take a decision on this on 17 December. I will return to this building-block approach in a moment, because a number of questions are linked to it.
I note that here too, rather like in the discussions in the Council, various priorities as to content are already being mentioned at this stage which should find a home in the new financial perspectives. As Mr Böge made explicit, one general point of departure is the discussion about the added value of what is happening at European level. I naturally recognise a number of priorities that have been presented, including the Lisbon strategy, that has been mentioned by many, the international role of the European Union, cohesion policy, security and specifically also the item of the 4% cap on structural funds. Those are all elements that are still being discussed here, as they are in the Council, and form part of the proposals we are in the process of formulating.
This brings me to the approach which we in the Presidency have decided to adopt for the steps to be taken during these six months in preparing the new financial perspectives. First of all, I should like to distance myself quite categorically from the questions about the 1% approach put by, among others, Mrs Dührkop Dührkop and Mrs Buitenweg, who was delighted that this approach would be abandoned. As President of the Council, I have not abandoned anything, and neither have I held on to anything. I am not speaking here on behalf of the Netherlands, nor on behalf of the Group of Six, who, as you know, have adopted this position about the 1%. I am addressing you as President of the Council. As President, I have done precisely those things that a number of you regard as grounds for criticism, Mr Karas, for example, who urged me to talk about priorities, or others who questioned how I could solve this problem from a financial point of view. We have opted for the building-block approach, precisely because it allows the political priorities, the priorities as to content, and not the money, to be put first. That is the step that we are now trying to achieve by 17 December, so this is exactly along the lines of many remarks which I have made in the past. Since I seem to perceive some confusion about this, I should like to reiterate that the Commission proposal is very definitely the point of departure, although we all know that the Member States are entitled to adopt positions other than that proposed by the Commission. What the building-block approach tries to do quite simply is to combine, classify and put into a readily understood format the different positions of different Member States in terms of category and subject, thus enabling us in the Council to make more informed decisions politically speaking. That will only benefit the discussion as a whole and may even be advantageous to you. I am therefore delighted to hear, as Mr Walter made explicit, that Parliament will venture a similar attempt. I think that with this, I have responded to most remarks about the building-block approach and the line taken by the presidency.
I would now like to turn my attention to the other aspect. Not expenditure, but revenue and own resources, which one or two of you briefly mentioned. We all agree on how important these are. Parliament’s right to be consulted is unmistakable and abundantly obvious and there is no doubt as to the fact that you will be making use of it where this section of the financial perspectives is concerned. One or two Members of this House also mentioned the generic correction mechanism. That is all covered by the Commission’s proposals.
Mrs Buitenweg specifically mentioned Eurotax. The Commission proposed to open this possibility for the next financial perspectives in 2014. I can inform you that the Council is currently discussing that and that it will continue to do so. By way of update on the discussion, I can inform you that it is unlikely that the Council will argue in favour of bringing this date forward any earlier than proposed by the Commission.
Another specific point that has been mentioned by a number of you – Mrs Jensen, I believe was the first one, but Mr Walter and others followed suit – concerns the duration of the financial perspectives and the seven-year term. The Commission has proposed to apply the seven-year term once more, and this is also still being discussed in the Council. We have not adopted a position on this. You know just as I do that the multi-annual budget is a framework within which the annual provisions are made. We do not lay down everything in exact detail for seven years, or however many years, but I do not need to tell you that. What matters are the ceilings within which there is scope for annual allocations, provided that the margins are sufficient.
Finally, I am looking forward to working with the European Parliament, for the remaining time that I will be in the role of President. I am also saying this on behalf of the Council. We will not be accepting foregone conclusions, as some of you fear. First of all, at all times, but certainly now during the preparations of these financial perspectives, the Council listens very carefully to the opinions, remarks, signals or resolutions in the European Parliament. I cannot speak formally on behalf of the Luxembourg Presidency, but I can say that it seems a good idea to me to continue the informal way in which contacts between Council and the European Parliament have been established during the preparatory stages.
Which brings me to my last remark. I do not entertain the worst-case scenarios one or two in this House have suggested in connection with the question as to what we will do if things do not go to plan. We should beware of a self-fulfilling prophecy and should consider how we dealt with confrontation between the European Parliament and the Council about the annual budget. As you know, the negotiations were tough and in a tense atmosphere. If truth be told, the Council’s and Parliament’s starting positions were very different, but we have struck a sound compromise. This compromise is beneficial to the European Parliament, to the Council and, above all, to Europe, and all of this on time despite tense negotiations. I think that that should be an example of how we can look toward the multi-annual budget."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples