Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-06-07-Speech-2-201"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20050607.25.2-201"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, I too should like to reiterate our thanks to Mr Böge, and I think it appropriate that his report mentions not only the EU’s expenses but also, in a number of paragraphs, the need for the revision of the own-resources decision; unlike some other speakers, I take the view that it is completely undeserved that one country should be entitled to a correction mechanism every year, while that is not the case for other countries that are in the same situation.
There are a few key points I should like to mention. I am in favour of cofinancing agricultural expenses for the reasons mentioned in the report. I am opposed to renationalisation. We must have the same rules across Europe, but Mr Böge’s proposals are acceptable. Flexibility is also a useful tool in the budget, not only in the items themselves but also with regard to cofinancing percentages of structural aid. It may well be the case that richer countries have a higher cofinancing percentage than poor countries. The role of the European Investment Bank should be enhanced in structural expenses and so should that of the European Investment Fund. We can draw on good examples from the past.
Finally, there is one more point I should like to make about common foreign and security policy. I take the view that those expenses should also fall completely within Parliament’s competence. It should not be simply up to the Council; Parliament must approve them as well."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples