Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2004-02-10-Speech-2-197"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20040210.9.2-197"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, I will say a few words and then Commissioner Schreyer will reply to some of the more technical questions.
There has been one general criticism running through this debate – a debate for which I am sincerely grateful, because Parliament has genuinely exercised its institutional pride on the issue of the budget and has given us precious advice – criticism made by some important Members of Parliament, beginning with Mr Wynn: a lack of ambition, as Mr Fiori also pointed out, and the assertion that an excess of realism leads to weakness.
So, I should like to point out that the structure of the budget we are presenting indicates a radical change with the past – not only quantitatively but also qualitatively; it constitutes an ambitious project that will give rise to serious problems and a fierce debate when the time comes for it to be adopted. I ask you to consider just a few figures: I have spoken about sustainable development; I did not want to provide analytical data because I believe that we need to consider such data together at some length, but in relation to the Lisbon process funds will increase by 62.8% – from EUR 47 billion in 2006 to EUR 76 billion in 2013 – allowing for a 32% increase in cohesion funds, 300% for funds earmarked for education and training, 200% for research funds, 400% for funds earmarked for competitiveness and networks. We have made choices that are coherent, precise and dramatically different from those of Lisbon: we have placed, within the context of an extremely ambitious draft budget, appropriations for the area of justice, which is one of the major areas of the Union – it was not by chance that I referred to it as one of the Union’s three lines of action – that is to say funds are to increase by almost 200% from EUR 1 billion in 2006 to EUR 3.6 billion in 2013. These, I repeat, are radical changes. Finally, the international situation: funds are to increase by almost 40% from EUR 11 billion in 2006 to EUR 15.7 billion in 2013.
So then, we have made some stark choices – which I hope will be accepted – in keeping precisely in line with the objectives. We did not, ladies and gentlemen, begin building from the roof, but from the foundations, studying the new objectives and analysing what had been decided in previous years with the decisions taken at Lisbon and subsequent decisions. On this basis we have constructed a coherent budget so that Europe can relaunch itself, re-establish a united policy on justice and internal affairs and re-establish its voice in the world. There are three areas on which we have consolidated and focused our attention, and therefore this is a response which I consider ambitious; realistic and ambitious. I say realistic because it is clear that genuine situations, temperaments and even political trends cannot be ignored. I assure you that the procession of the six ambassadors who brought me the 1% letter resembled more than anything a funeral cortege, and it is clear that this makes no sense in a Europe that must react, that must go forward, that has enormous responsibilities for everyone. So, we have taken a major gamble: stark choices, extremely radical choices, as the detailed line by line analysis of the budget will show.
In conclusion, a final observation: why have we started so early, Mr Fiori? Out of respect for those who are to come after us. The timeframes are extremely long. When, at the end of our term of office, we hand over the whole project with its roadmap, when our work is completed, they will need – so it has been said – about twelve months, possibly more: going on past experience, 18 months will be needed to fine-tune the finished product; that means the beginning of 2006, January/February 2006. Care must be taken to provide enough time to learn the procedures, prepare the financing procedures and organise the financing structure, which is only just adequate, so that the objectives we have set ourselves can be met. The work we have carried out is wide-ranging but absolutely essential. It is clear that none of the decisions taken today will become operative under this term, we are well aware of that. It will be the new Parliament that will decide but, if we do not place the new Parliament in the position to decide, it will not be possible to make payments at the beginning of 2007. We have worked on this, Mr Fiori, because I can assure you of one thing: we never attempt to perform tasks that are not useful or are unnecessary. This has involved an enormous amount of work and perhaps we would willingly have avoided it had it not been for the benefit of the Union."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples