Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-05-11-Speech-3-237"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20050511.19.3-237"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, the following priorities have been put forward in the estimates of income and expenditure in the European Parliament’s budget for 2006.
First, the successful completion of the 2004 round of EU enlargement, by fully integrating representatives from the new EU Member States into the EU institutions, as well as preparations for the 2007 round of EU enlargement, when Romania and Bulgaria will join. The current situation is worrying: despite more than a year having already passed since EU enlargement, many permanent posts set aside for the new Member States still remain vacant. It is forecast that by the end of 2005 only 78% of the permanent posts allocated to the new Member States will be filled. The European Parliament’s Secretary-General will therefore have to issue a report on the reasons for the delay and make proposals for remedying the situation. One of the problems to be emphasised in this connection is the excessive red-tape and slow procedures for taking on staff.
The second priority is effective and highly targeted use of European Parliament budget resources. This priority encompasses such matters as: focusing EU institutional expenditure on fundamental tasks; supporting requests for new permanent positions from the budget only after having assessed the possibility of redistributing resources and staff within the framework of the existing budget; supporting new initiatives only after having assessed their impact on the budget and interinstitutional cooperation with a view to economical and effective use of budget resources.
Of course, the issue of the sum of over 200 million euro per year which is spent on top of everything else in order to provide the European Parliament with a seat in Strasbourg is still a topical one. The main problem is the maintenance of two European Parliament buildings in parallel, in Brussels and Strasbourg. It must be acknowledged that this matter falls within the jurisdiction of the European Council.
The third priority is improving EU budget terminology, making it more complete and more transparent in order to show taxpayers more clearly how their resources are used. Improvements will be needed to the draft terminology that has been proposed, so that it can better fulfil these criteria.
In speaking about the European Parliament budget, I would like to stress that a total budget expenditure ceiling will be set according to careful evaluation of justified needs. Achieving a ceiling of 20% of total administrative expenditure is not an end in itself. The proposal by the European Parliament’s Secretary-General sets a budget for the European Parliament for 2006 of 1.3416 billion euro. We welcome the Budget Committee’s support for the rapporteurs’ proposal to reduce this amount by 20 million euro. The experience of previous years, when large amounts of unused resources have been reallocated and some money has not even been used at all, demonstrates that we have an opportunity to spend European taxpayers’ money more prudently. The final ceiling on expenditure for the European Parliament’s budget will be set at first reading. I would like to stress as important aspects of Parliament’s work in 2006, first a better explanation to EU citizens of the European Parliament’s work, placing particular emphasis, in this connection, on the role of the European Parliament’s information offices in the EU Member States, and second, preparations by the European Parliament to play a larger role in the legislative sphere, as provided in the EU Constitutional Treaty.
Finally, I should like to emphasise that 2006 is the last year of the existing financial perspective. In this regard, the question of the amount of payment appropriations from the joint EU 2006 budget is particularly topical. It is important that the total amount of 2006 budget commitment and payment appropriations should correspond to those commitments which the EU has entered into, including those connected with EU enlargement.
I would like to call on the EU Council to reconsider the attitude it adopted in connection with the EU budget for 2006, where it artificially blocked the amount of payment appropriations. If we want to see the EU as a reliable partner, it is important that the EU should fulfil its commitments, including the commitments which it entered into in connection with the enlargement of the EU. It is important that in this financial perspective the commitments that have been provided for should be correspondingly reflected in the budget for 2006."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples