Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-12-14-Speech-3-013"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20051214.6.3-013"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, I do not need to convince you that tomorrow’s European Council is a crucial stage for Europe.
Finally, I am very pleased that the three institutions should be in agreement on the initiative taken by the Commission with regard to the European consensus for development. As you know, this consensus will also – we hope – be the subject of the European Council conclusions. For the first time in 50 years of cooperation, this European consensus for development defines a common set of values, principles, aims and resources designed to eradicate poverty.
With the adoption of the European Parliament’s resolution on the European Union’s development policy statement, this consensus becomes a genuine European tripartite statement on development. Today, the seal is set on an agreement promoting development. We must now take the promises of extra money and apply them in specific ways in the real world. The Commission will actively call on the Member States to honour their commitments. We not only made these commitments between ourselves, but also at the United Nations. Once again, we are proud, as Europeans, to champion this dossier at international level, but we must now turn this ambition and these commitments into practical measures.
I am now going to speak to you about the
of this European Council: the financial perspective.
As you know, whenever I speak about financial matters I switch to English! I have been doing that for the last month, so I shall now continue in English.
We all know what is at stake this week. This is the opportunity for Europe to show its citizens that it is capable of deciding on tough issues, that it can meet their expectations and that it will hold true to its values. The Commission has set out its ideas. Parliament has done the same. Now we are waiting for the Council. Any further delay and implementation of our policies will be delayed. Policies delayed are policies denied. I know that there are other technical options for keeping spending programmes going, but let us be frank: these are temporary measures only. The Europe of today needs greater security and ambition for its new priorities.
The Commission is playing its role. To unblock negotiations in October, I set out five proposals which have helped to kick-start discussions. On Monday I set out to Prime Minister Blair and other national leaders and to the President of this Parliament principles and 12 specific proposals to reach what I believe can be an ambitious and fair agreement this week on the financial perspectives. I welcome the support I have received within this House and amongst the Member States for the Commission’s position. I want to set out today where the European Council should focus its attention in the coming days.
We need an ambitious Europe. The Hampton Court Summit showed the scale of the challenges before us and the role which the European Union must play in meeting them. But we must be coherent. Having defined the objectives, the Member States must now provide the means to achieve them. To support enlargement, we need investment; to support reform and modernisation, we need investment; to increase trade liberalisation, we need investment. Ambition is not realised through communiqués and great and grand statements. It needs action. And action needs means and instruments.
Europe’s credibility is severely damaged when some do not put their money where their mouth is. A modern budget needs to recognise the realities of an enlarged Europe, so it must support growth, with cohesion policy focused on competitiveness. It must support Europeans adjusting to globalisation, immigration and the threats to security. It must avoid reversing recent reforms, such as the shift to rural development in agriculture, and it cannot downgrade the essential task of reconnecting with our citizens. Heading 3b of the financial perspectives is not an optional extra; it is of central importance to the Union’s work.
There is another direct consequence of a tight budget. It makes it all the more essential that every euro be used to best effect, and seven years is a long time. We must not close the door to sensible adjustments in the future. With our original proposals, the emphasis Parliament’s resolution put on flexibility was prudent: at much lower levels it is indispensable. The European Council must leave room for these issues to be debated within Parliament and the Council, as the two arms of the budgetary authority.
The principle of flexibility should be carried through to the review clause. I said in June that this will be essential in reaching a deal. I remain convinced of that. We need a comprehensive, ambitious and open review clause. Of course, any change must be agreed unanimously, but it is essential that this Commission and this Parliament have the opportunity to launch a genuine debate, without taboos, about the future of the European Union’s spending and resources.
We identified the immediate challenges at Hampton Court; we must now provide ourselves with the resources to meet these challenges, and that is what is at stake in the financial perspective. I will return to the financial perspective shortly, but allow me first of all to say a few words about other important issues to be addressed at the European Council.
The budget also needs to be fair: fair in spending, but fair in contributions too. I think that we have come a long way in this respect, with a true recognition that the impact of enlargement on the budget has changed the situation. Now we need one further step to ensure that the burden of that impact is genuinely shared. That means further movement from the British side on their abatement. That will be crucial to reaching an agreement. That change should be linked to enlargement and, since this enlargement is permanent, so should the change be permanent, just as it was when the United Kingdom agreed changes to its abatement in 1988 and 1999.
One aspect of last week’s proposals which concerns the Commission is the creation of parallel rules: one set for the Europe of 15, one set for the rest. This creates a very unfortunate effect. A two-speed cohesion policy, with one set of rules focused on competitiveness and another on financial transfers, is not the way to build a competitive Europe or a cohesive Europe. We need to ensure the coherence of our instruments. If there is some differentiation – and in some cases we need differentiation – it should be based on objective criteria in terms of the relative development of the Member States or the different regions, and not on those who were already members and new members. The European Union we want to build is not the European Union of old members and new members, it is a Union of all members with exactly the same dignity, and that is a very important point.
Making exceptions and special arrangements not only undermines coherence, it creates new risks for financial management. As you know, we take our accountability to this House and to the public at large very seriously. We take seriously the fiscal pressure on the Member States. The Commission made great efforts to develop a package of measures which were simple and comprehensible and will permit high standards of control. Alongside the revised financial regulation, they aim to make programmes more user-friendly and more efficient, so I regret that the principles of value for money and sound financial management seem to be sacrificed in order to achieve an agreement. The proposals on managing cohesion policy and voluntary modulation must be revised.
Sound management can also be undermined if cost-cutting takes the easy way out and targets administration. It is simply not credible to suddenly bring to an end the process of bringing our institutions up to speed with the last enlargement, and still less credible to make zero provision for Bulgaria and Romania.
I have to tell you, very frankly, that I know it is very easy and popular – I would say demagogic – whenever there is a need to make some cuts, to make those cuts in the administration. But in the next financial perspectives, we have to accommodate Bulgaria and Romania in all the institutions: in the Commission, in Parliament, in all the rest. I have to say that we do not have the resources now for that. So, if you want to have Bulgaria and Romania, we should have this in our budget.
I know that you share many of the concerns I have set out today. I know this because many of them echo your own resolution and your own comments. I welcome Parliament’s position. It contains sound principles and imaginative solutions which can only make agreement more likely and results more effective. I am determined to do everything I can to help the European Council reach agreement this week.
I urge the Presidency, with its special responsibility, and the Member States to show the courage and determination to reach a deal which matches our ambitions. I fervently hope that when I address the Conference of Presidents next week our task will be to chart the path towards an interinstitutional agreement that will take Europe into the next decade with real confidence. But we must do that with confidence and ambition. I myself, you in this House, and, I hope, all here today will always reject the narrow, nationalistic vision of a mini Europe.
At Hampton Court, we discussed the way in which Europe can prepare itself for globalisation. We agreed to restart our work in several areas, in particular research, universities, demographics, energy, immigration, security and external relations. I will report to the European Council on the work under way following the informal summit. In this context, I would draw your attention to a few key issues.
Yesterday, the Commission put the finishing touches to the revision of its sustainable development strategy. The aim is to increase the level of ambition of this strategy by making sure that the latter is implemented more effectively. The most important factors are as follows: to see to it that all Community policies are underpinned by the principles of sustainable development; to make a firm commitment to accomplish the aims by scheduling regular meetings between our institutions with a view to taking stock of the situation and of reviewing the Member States’ practices; and more systematically to involve the main actors in the area of sustainable development, and not only the institutions, but also the world of business – which must make significant efforts – as well, of course, as the regional and local authorities.
The Commission will work closely with Parliament and the Council to prepare as well as possible for this important stage. You can count on my personal commitment and on that of the College. In this context, the success of the Montreal Conference comes as very welcome news. It shows that the European Commission’s and the European Union’s leadership in the context of climate change has borne fruit.
I shall now turn to the issue of growth and employment in the context of the new Lisbon Strategy. The Commission is pleased to observe that the renewed strategy for growth and employment is now well under way. The national programmes that have been established show that the Lisbon Strategy’s new system of governance is beginning to be integrated by the Member States.
I should now like, for my part, to note the following points: there is clearly a very close link between the economic challenges we identified at the informal summit and those that the Member States are identifying in their national programmes. The Commission will assume all of its responsibilities in its report in January by explaining in a clear and constructive way the strengths and weaknesses of these national programmes. It will also make sure that it singles out good ideas and practices that everybody could use.
Another important, and extremely topical, issue is that of immigration. The Commission is determined to make progress in the development of a horizontal approach to migration issues. This approach would consist of looking at immigration from the angle of prosperity, solidarity and security within the European Union and of doing so in close cooperation with the third countries concerned. This is the spirit of the communication on an action programme relating to legal immigration, which the College is to debate next week.
The Commission also welcomes the comprehensive strategy to combat terrorism, which should result from the forthcoming European Council. The instruments recently proposed by the Commission with regard to information exchange, the interoperability of databases or the protection of critical infrastructure should be adopted and implemented as soon as possible. We desperately need these instruments in order to strengthen the effectiveness of our action. This is, once again, one of the areas in which there is distinct European added value when viewed in the light of the contribution Europe can make to the action carried out at national level."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples