Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2012-07-03-Speech-2-567-000"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20120703.22.2-567-000"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Madam President, I should like to thank the Members for their comments. I see that it is very fashionable now to compare national budgets with the European budget and this is partly justified, but only partly, as there is no full analogy for several reasons.
The European budget is always in equilibrium: no deficit, no indebtedness. This is because of its size: our budget is 1% of gross national income (GNI) but it is not comparable to the 4% or 5% of GNI spent already on assisting the financial institutions of the European Union and this is not the reason for the trillions of debt accumulated in the Member States. However, it might be part of the solution of how to enhance, in a responsible way, growth and jobs opportunities.
If there is an analogy, it lies in our efforts to save whatever can be saved. This will be in administration because, for the first time since the beginning of the European Community, in 2013 the number of EU officials is going to be reduced, no longer growing. This also concerns agency staff – I am saying this for Ms Hohlmeier’s sake. Are there performance savings? Yes: if we need adjustments, for example, in the development cooperation instruments in Latin America and Asia where some programmes are not performing, then we are making savings and this is clearly reflected in the draft budget for 2013.
Taken altogether, our spending is now EUR 66 billion, less than agreed for the financial perspective for the period 2007-2013. This is the net result of performance savings and being restrained in budgeting in the European Union. But what is the budget?
This is about the means to cover legitimate bills, bills coming for approved projects in the Member States. Ninety-four percent of the budget goes outside Brussels; only 6% concerns administration. What is the result when we delay or do not pay? That is the problem of reimbursements to the finance ministries: this means deteriorating liquidity in Member States, or really reducing investment possibilities in the Member States or not supplying the means to overcome the credit crunch for small and medium-sized companies. And the net result, the final result, is the mountain of unpaid commitments. That is about the future bills; no real solution. This is not a real option.
The 2013 budget was built on the deliveries coming from the Member States and I agree with Alain Lamassoure that it is perhaps a little bit schizophrenic to send the bills to Brussels. We evaluate very critically and then we make an effort to respect the deals and we cannot be criticised for respecting the bills coming from 27 countries. This is a little bit of a schizophrenic approach to the budget. I do not think that anybody is surprised that with the 2013 budget, which is the last, we have additional requests for payments. But it is a practical test of what was called the ‘growth agenda of the European Union’, done in a fiscally responsible way."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata | |
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples