Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2012-07-03-Speech-2-533-000"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20120703.22.2-533-000"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Madam President, there are two parallel procedures as usual on the basis of our proposal for the 2013 budget and this is being done in the very specific climate of today’s Europe. These are the fiscal consolidations seen as
of sustainable development in Europe and, on the other hand, even at a time of crisis, the need for investment to create conditions for future growth and jobs. This was clearly stated in the conclusions of the recent European summit.
I think that the answer as presented by the Commission in the 2013 draft budget is the correct one and I think the mandate of Parliament, as expressed by the rapporteur, Mr La Via, is going in the same direction. We need restraint – that is clear – in administration; there are performance savings in the other areas, very restrained growth of commitment, 2% only at the end of the financial perspective but, on the other hand, we need a sufficient level of payments to pay out what is legally binding – what is financially and legally binding for 2013 – and this is the end of the financial perspective that cannot come as a surprise to anybody. At the end of the financial perspective the programmes are gaining maturity and the payments are accelerating, so the bigger need for payment.
There is also the specificity of the 2013 budget; the n+2 rule and the n+3 rule means that we should pay at the latest in 2013 for the commitments from 2010 and 2011. Meeting of the payment obligations is not my duty. This is a collective duty of the European Union. I underlined the areas with the biggest growth potential – research, development and cohesion.
Deferring payments is not an option because it either results in a liquidity problem in the Member States or a shortage of investment possibilities and increasing appeals for the future. That was clearly reflected in the discussion over the payment methodology agreed by the Chair of the Committee on Budgetary Control. Perhaps that is a modest forecast for the future on the payment levels at the end of May.
I think we see a lot of understanding of the logic of the multiannual financial perspective for the annual budgets at the end of the annual perspective in the mandate as expressed by Mr La Via. What is coming on the other side, in the Council, is a matter of concern. There is a propensity to cut, even though knowledge is widespread as to what the real needs are for 2013, as we are not basing our forecasts and our draft budget on our own assumptions. This comes from the Member States – we are cutting. We are less optimistic than the Member States themselves in shaping the level of payments for 2013.
Nevertheless, I believe that we are able to find interinstitutional cooperation. I have to thank the rapporteur for already making the indicative list of pilot projects and preparatory actions available and making implementation in 2013 easier. Once more, I am confident that even under the specific extreme conditions of our time, we can find a proper way of dealing with the budget for the next year."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
"condicio sine qua non"1
|
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples