Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2008-03-10-Speech-1-170"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20080310.21.1-170"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Madam President, the European Solidarity Fund was created in 2002 in the wake of the disastrous floods which struck in central Europe, affecting both EU Member States and candidate countries. At the time it was agreed the fund should be EUR 1 billion a year. This fund was meant to bring relief to those who had suffered damage due to major catastrophes. The extent of catastrophic damage must be at least EUR 3 billion or no less than 0.6% of the Member State’s GNP. If the damage is restricted to a small area, it could be less, but regionally it could be relatively more.
The damage now under discussion was the result of the large-scale flooding in the United Kingdom in June and July 2007. The damage is put at EUR 4.6 billion, so it is eligible for compensation. The Commission is proposing EUR 162 million.
In its budget, the Committee on Budgets is recommending support for providing finance in the manner the Commission is suggesting. However, it requires Parliament to approve mobilisation of that support. For that reason, Mr Böge’s report on the mobilisation of the Solidarity Fund needs to be adopted first.
In other respects, the first amending budget mainly concerns agencies and the administrative management of the Galileo Programme. In the budget a European Research Council Executive Agency was set up. Its creation accords with the budgetary procedure agreed for this year. Under the amending budget a joint executive agency, the Research Executive Agency (REA), is created, for the other programmes under the Seventh Framework Programme for research too. This is also in line with the earlier budgetary procedure.
Similarly, the amendments to the staffing timetable for the border control agency, Frontex, which Parliament had called for have been made. Parliament increased the funds for this agency by EUR 30 million in the budgetary procedure, and these now constitute the necessary additional funds.
The toughest problem relates to the Galileo satellite navigation programme. Parliament’s great achievement was that it succeeded in the budget negotiations in guaranteeing the programme’s funding by increasing the amount set aside for it by EUR 2.4 billion for six years. This partly came about through an adjustment to the muiltiannual financial framework. The project thus clearly became an EU project.
Now it is a matter of administering the project. The Commission is proposing EUR 2 million in the form of a transfer from operating appropriations to administration. The project’s administration, however, is in a mess. It has mainly been managed in the EU by GSA, the Galileo Supervisory Authority
It task has been mainly concerned with permits and partnership discussions between the public and private sectors. The private sector having been excluded in the initial phase, the GSA’s role is unclear, as is that of the Commission and the European Space Agency (ESA). It was at first thought that the ESA would be responsible for implementing the project’s technical side, which the EU would oversee and fit out. The division of labour between the various actors, such as the Commission and the separate agencies, is, however, unclear.
The Committee on Industry, Research and Energy is therefore proposing in Mrs Barsi-Pataky’s report that the GSA should be abolished. Given these circumstances, the Committee on Budgets could not agree to the transfer of the appropriation to the Commission, but instead simply proposes the creation of a PM line. The Commission promised that it would effect the transfer within the scope of its competence before Galileo’s entire administration system had been agreed. Changing the amending budget in this respect would therefore not delay the project, but it would ensure Parliament’s negotiating position. I hope that the plenary will be able to go along with the Committee’s unanimous position as regards the first amending budget."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples