Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2010-10-19-Speech-2-341"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2010-10-19"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Parliament's position on the 2011 draft budget as modified by the Council - all sections - Draft amending budget No 3/2010: Section III - Commission - BAM (Banana Accompanying Measures) (debate)2
dcterms:Language	"de"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20101019.20.2-341"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2010-10-19-Speech-2-3432
lpv:speaker	lp:Ingeborg Grässle2
lpv:spokenAs	substitute; Special committee on the policy challenges and budgetary resources for a sustainable European Union after 2013 (2010-06-17--2011-06-30)3 member; BUDG (2009-07-16--2012-01-18)3 substitute; EMPL (2009-07-16--2012-01-18)3 member; Delegation for relations with the Palestinian Legislative Council (2009-09-16--2014-06-30)3 substitute; Delegation to the Parliamentary Assembly of the Union for the Mediterranean (2010-03-10--2014-06-30)3 member_of_the_bureau; EPP (2009-07-24--2014-06-30)3 member; CONT (2009-07-16--2012-01-18)3 unknown; Christlich Demokratische Union Deutschlands (2009-07-14--2014-06-30)3 substitute; Delegation for relations with Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Serbia, Montenegro and Kosovo (2009-09-16--2014-06-30)3
lpv:translated text	"Madam President, Mr Wathelet, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, in the 2011 budget, the most important thing is public opinion in the Member States, and we must give the Council credit for that – you have done very well in this regard. You presented a figure of minus 2.77%, but that is pure nonsense to the national parliaments that are unfamiliar with this. In other words, you have made cuts where there was too much money on the line anyway, and afterwards the European Parliament, which is trying in good faith to cancel these cuts, becomes the villain, so to speak, and gets the blame for this. That is all rather ingenious, but much too transparent for you to be able to succeed in this. As a member of the Committee on Budgetary Control, I cannot see any sign that the Council is interested in an EU budget that is better in the long term. Where then is our joint monitoring and where is our joint budgetary control? As far as the Council is concerned, that is not working out. I would like to request – and here I am appealing to my fellow Members in particular, because tomorrow we will also be talking about the reserves – for us to refine our control mechanisms. My concern here is, above all, the administrative budget, simply because the focus is always very heavily on this in the Member States, too. Since 2007, we have had screening of staff in the area of administration and in the area of coordination. We must continue to carry out this screening. We have once again created a reserve for this. The Commission has 100 official director-general posts – 100 since the summer. According to its own benchmark, however, it is only permitted to have 87. Another reserve will serve to demand that the Commission go back to its own figure of 87. We have said that we need better monitoring of the implementation of EU law in the Member States, because compliance with the law is a cornerstone of the European Union. There is also a reserve for this. We need to ask ourselves what will become of the Directorate-General for Development with the establishment of the External Action Service, and what will happen to the EuropeAid Cooperation Office? Many people are sitting around there, and if we are not careful, just as many people will still be sitting in the delegations from the Commission as from the External Action Service. So far, we have only achieved an increase in efficiency in the External Action Service of 1%, whereas the target is 10%. Here, too, we would have a rewarding joint task, which I warmly invite the Council to carry out."@en1
lpv:videoURI	<go to Events_and_structure europarl>2

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph