Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2013-07-02-Speech-2-734-000"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20130702.56.2-734-000"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Mr President, there are very few Members in the Chamber tonight but those Members who are here are obviously very passionate about the subject being debated tonight. Although I do feel sometimes that there are some Members – not the ones in the Chamber – who sometimes forget what PIF is all about. It is all about looking at the extent to which EU funds and revenue are at risk of fraud and this, of course, is a very important topic for EU taxpayers.
Sometimes we are also guilty of not recognising when there are improvements. In 2011, for example, reported fraud was down by 35% and the financial impact of fraud was down by 37%. And recovery rates also improved, from 46% to 52%, although in all these areas of course there is room for further improvement.
We should also recognise that 94% of the EU budget is spent by Member States – and therefore it is not surprising that most fraud is committed at Member State level. That is why my report does call for a full evaluation by the Commission of the shared management system.
I also find it surprising that some Member States have very high levels of fraud and some Member States report no fraud at all. So obviously individual Member States are using different ways to measure and to deal with fraud in their own countries. For example, conviction rates range from 14% to 80%.
Therefore, in my view, there are things the Commission could do to improve matters. They could monitor control systems in Member States, standardise the definition of fraud in Member States, establish a uniform reporting measure, consider the lack of harmonised criminal law across Member States, promote greater transparency – which is called for in my report and many other reports from this Parliament – and of course it could try to improve cooperation and coordination between Member States in tackling these issues.
When we look at the figures for individual elements within the budget, once again we see the need to improve the situation in cohesion policy and in agriculture. These two remain the two highest areas of fraud and error – and of course we should always point out that there is a difference between fraud and error. But there are other areas within the budget as well, like the External Action Service, which need some improvements.
There is also the issue of revenues. We should not forget the issue of revenues. It is estimated that EUR 1 trillion per year is lost to tax evasion and tax avoidance. That is the equivalent of EUR 2 000 for every citizen in the European Union. Although some progress has been made in VAT and customs, in cigarette and tobacco smuggling, some further progress still needs to be made, and unfortunately the Council on many occasions blocks that progress. For example, they are currently blocking two VAT directives and I call on the Council to unblock those initiatives as soon as possible and other initiatives as well.
For all of us this is an important topic. It is vital that every possible euro, indeed every possible cent, in the EU budget is spent on promoting jobs and growth. Do we not need it? Therefore I welcome most of the amendments put down by colleagues for tomorrow’s vote. Not all, of course: we are not going to agree on everything, but I welcome most of them because I believe that what we are doing tonight, this debate and this vote tomorrow, should reassure taxpayers that this Parliament takes the topic of tax and tax fraud and fraud in general as a serious issue, and indeed others should do so as well, particularly Member States."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata | |
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples