Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2012-05-10-Speech-4-063-000"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20120510.9.4-063-000"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, today we are debating the 2010 budget and the European Court of Auditor’s report in this regard.
This report contains both encouraging and less encouraging elements. Firstly, with regard to the funds that are directly controlled as well as managed by the Commission, it can be seen that the error rate is falling. This is the case in agricultural policy in particular, where an encouraging result was achieved with a 2.3% error rate.
On the other hand, in cohesion policy, which has been a problem area for many years, we have an error rate of 7.7% – and two thirds of these errors should have been rectified by the Member States. That should not allow us to cease in our attempts to influence the Member States in this regard to ensure that the error rate is reduced.
At this point, I would like first of all – on behalf of the Group of the Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe, but also as committee chair – to thank Commissioner Šemeta as well as the President of the European Court of Auditors most sincerely for their excellent cooperation. I expressly agree with those Members who welcome the fact that the Council is also here today, represented by Mr Wammen from the Danish Presidency. The cooperation with the Commission and the European Court of Auditors is exemplary. The cooperation with the Council, Mr Wammen, is in need of improvement – and it is on the part of the Council that this improvement is required. I would like to ask and encourage you to pass that message on to the other members of the Council, too.
As Parliament, we expect an improvement in use of funds for which we have shared responsibility, and for the Council now to accommodate Parliament here in the trialogue so that in future, we can reduce the error rate. After all, we must also finally make some progress on the discharge of the Council. It is not acceptable for there to be public expenditure that is not subject to any democratic scrutiny. ‘No taxation without representation’ was the battle cry of the American Revolution. Democracy requires there to be no public expenditure without democratic scrutiny. You mentioned the principle of reciprocity, but that is clearly not appropriate in terms of the relationship between the Council and Parliament, as the Treaty of Lisbon clearly stipulates that the Council recommends, but Parliament decides. That is not reciprocity; it is not symmetry, but asymmetry. Here it is important for Parliament, as the directly elected body of the citizens, to have its rights upheld."@en1
|
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples