Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2009-10-20-Speech-2-309"

PredicateValue (sorted: default)
rdf:type
dcterms:Date
dcterms:Is Part Of
dcterms:Language
lpv:document identification number
"en.20091020.35.2-309"2
lpv:hasSubsequent
lpv:speaker
lpv:spokenAs
lpv:translated text
"Mr President, I am going to speak in my mother tongue because I am also protesting against any kind of law restricting the use of a person’s mother tongue. The 2010 budget is being drafted in the shadow of the financial crisis. State Secretary, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, we all have to cope with this crisis in some manner or other. The crisis has sown uncertainty among investors, made it more difficult to obtain credit, increased unemployment and reduced production. Is the European Union able to respond to this? Does it have something to say on the dangers caused by climate change or on terrorism? Is it able to protect the EU’s borders? Is it welcoming refugees with an equitable approach? Parliament would like to have a budget that responds in the affirmative to all these questions, and Parliament is fairly united in this desire. There are no major differences dividing political groups. I would therefore, as rapporteur, like to thank all the political groups in Parliament for this. However, there is a serious difference of opinion between the Council and Parliament. Because of the crisis, the Council would like the smallest budget possible, which is understandable looking at it from the point of view of national parliaments and governments. However, we in this House believe that Parliament has a huge number of instruments available that should be made to work even more efficiently, more smoothly and with greater impact, precisely so that we can overcome the crisis. What does all this mean in actual figures? Earlier, when we were thinking about 2010, it was with a seven-year budget in mind. A decision was then made which would allow, in the current situation, a budget of EUR 134 billion in terms of payment levels. On the other hand, the Council is thinking of a figure of EUR 120 billion, while Parliament does not regard the expenditure of EUR 134 billion as being realistic, is taking into account national governments’ problems and will end up proposing EUR 127 billion if the vote on Thursday is guided by the recommendation from the Committee on Budgets. We must, of course, ask what sense is there in making promises intended for a seven-year cycle in a five-year cycle if we are never going to keep those promises. This is actually the situation we are in because every year, the annual budget is much smaller than we discussed the time before. However, there is also an even bigger concern. Annual budgets also feature commitments, many of which remain unfulfilled. We are already lagging more than one annual budget behind, with this gap increasing from one year to the next. Therefore, raising the payment levels is an absolute must. Otherwise, we will seem to have the same scenario as in every other year: the Council chips away at the Commission’s draft, while Parliament suggests even larger figures. However, I would like to draw your attention to the fact that the situation is not entirely like this. These proposals have not come about from one line to the next, in a mechanical fashion, snipping indiscriminately here and there. As a result of the crisis, everyone needs to tighten the purse strings. This is why, for certain purchases, we supported the Council’s more economical figures in the Committee on Budgets. Elsewhere, for instance, on the matter of staff assigned to particular tasks, we also took into account how the given task was executed. At the same time, it is very easy to make mistakes in this area. If we have made mistakes, we do not want to prevent the programmes from being implemented. If such an event occurs during the year, we will always be prepared to rectify the situation, but we advocate correct implementation and accurate planning. We must analyse whether the money that was spent yielded the benefit we were expecting and whether we achieved the objective we set ourselves. For example, it is difficult to be satisfied with the communications policy, but there may also be, of course, many more reasons, which are also much more complicated, to explain the lost referendums and the low electoral turnout. For this reason, it would be a mistake to reduce the resources for communications. We suggested establishing some reserves for certain lines, which can easily be released at the time when, based on current analyses, a promising communication strategy is being prepared. We must also look more closely in the future at the extent to which our objectives have been achieved. The European Court of Auditors recently published a survey on the successes and struggles of the dairy sector. Parliament is expecting the Commission to outline in the imminent Amending letter how the Milk Fund is going to work. We think that it also requires a separate budget line and a reserve of an appropriate amount. A legal basis must be created which takes into account the Court of Auditors’ observations and which will successfully help resolve the sector’s current problems. Therefore, it is not only about money, but also about the European Union providing better and more specific support to this sector. This is why I am calling on my fellow Members to try with the least possible disagreement to vote for a good, effective budget. It goes without saying we will have debates on this. It is only natural that each political group will also promote their views and seek to raise their profile. However, we will agree on the most important matters. In the case of the Milk Fund too, the fund itself is much more important than even how much money it will ultimately contain. The Committee on Budgets has submitted a proposal for a manageable amount. Thank you for your respectful attention."@en1
lpv:videoURI

Named graphs describing this resource:

1http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/English.ttl.gz
2http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/Events_and_structure.ttl.gz
3http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/spokenAs.ttl.gz

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph