Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2004-10-26-Speech-2-144"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20041026.12.2-144"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, Mr President-in-Office of the Council, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, in the September part-session we said that the draft budget presented to us by the Council took an accounting approach rather than a political approach. On Thursday we will vote here in Parliament on a clearly political reading of the budget. It is political in that it reflects the political priorities on the basis of which the parliamentary groups and Members stood for the European elections on 13 June. And we must remember that it was Parliament – the honourable Members – who stood for those elections, not the Council. All the honourable Members have thereby made commitments to the electorate which include defending and promoting measures which I hope are reflected in the draft budget I am presenting for your approval.
The amendments to this Heading 4 represent more than EUR 400 million, and I must consider them, in part, because they fundamentally respond to the wishes expressed by two important parliamentary committees: the Committee on Development and the Committee on Foreign Affairs.
In Heading 5 – the heading in which agreement may, in principle, have seemed the easiest to reach – the Council took it upon itself to make cuts which reduced the administrative spending of the Commission and the other institutions to one and a half points below the amount provided for in the Commission's preliminary draft and it is very difficult – as the Commissioner well knows – to maintain an administrative budget calculated to the last penny, if another institution then comes along and reduces it.
Thank heavens that the Commission – and I would congratulate the Commissioner once again in this regard – has managed to make an additional effort to save without reducing efficiency. In any event, I would like to say that the European Parliament wishes to re-establish the administrative spending laid down in the preliminary draft budget.
Given these circumstances, we have had to establish a series of priorities. They are the following:
Firstly, the Lisbon strategy and its job creation and growth policies, because they are included in practically all the political programmes on the basis of which the honourable Members stood for election. At a time of difficult and weak economic growth in the European Union, it would be suicidal not to strengthen those policies which are aimed precisely at growth, development and job creation. We have therefore voted for amendments which increase these lines relating to the Lisbon strategy by EUR 80 million.
Secondly, communications strategy, in particular, because of the European elections and the low turnout at those elections, because of our enlargement and the need to explain the idea of the Union much better to the new citizens and because we are in the midst of a constitutional debate on the future of the European Union, this is another priority for Parliament and we have, therefore, presented an amendment to the tune of EUR 24 million.
Thirdly, strengthening security, the fight against terrorism and the consolidation of a European immigration and asylum strategy. I believe this is a priority for all of you and, unfortunately, there is no need to explain why it must be a priority for Parliament and the European Union in 2005.
Fourthly, another of our fundamental priorities is the consolidation of the European Union's external action, with a particular emphasis on combating disease and poverty and assistance for geographical regions. In this regard, we follow the principle that the European Union's new commitments cannot be achieved at the expense of Parliament's traditional priorities, or to put it another way, new commitments require new resources.
Fifthly, we want a very serious debate with the Council on the funding of the decentralised Agencies, which I shall analyse later.
I would like to emphasise the support received by the political groups in translating the priorities into budgetary amendments. From the other coordinators I have received nothing but support and positive suggestions. They have all sacrificed other priorities and they have all had to offer their colleagues complicated explanations of the decisions taken. And this is a message I would like to make very clear to the Commission and the Council: this first reading expresses a clear and unequivocal political compromise for the November negotiation. We are not going to vote for a second reading which abandons our priorities unilaterally. If there are going to be any sacrifices, they must be made by all the institutions, by all of them.
It is also political in that it responds to one of the Council’s habitual strategies, which is to fund its own priorities before it funds Parliament’s. In other words, through the vote on Thursday we shall try to create an interinstitutional balance, and without that balance the European Union cannot function properly.
Let us now move on to the reading by headings, remembering that the vote the European Parliament will take on Thursday will be on the budget as a whole and that, as such, when it comes to the negotiation, we will take it to the three-way dialogues and to conciliation.
In Heading 1 – Agriculture – we have voted for EUR 50 779 million in commitment appropriations. Our reference has been the preliminary draft budget presented by the Commission, but we still have to provide the appropriations necessary to fulfil the Copenhagen criteria.
In subheading 1b) we have a political priority expressed by the Committee on Budgets and which, as such, will be included in the vote on Thursday. According to that, we raise the sum of EUR 57 million above the maximum limit of subheading 1b), the item which would go to the establishment and training of young farmers.
We have also increased appropriations on measures to eradicate animal diseases and food safety, because they are also Parliament’s priorities.
In Heading 2 we are going to vote for EUR 42 378 million in commitment appropriations. Payments are the essential in this category, the category in which the amendments we present on payments have the greatest impact. In order to prevent and absorb the RALs, which now amount, ladies and gentlemen, to EUR 122 000 million – which represent one budgetary year – we raise the draft preliminary budget in those lines in which the RALs double the annual commitments. In the other lines, we support the Commission’s requests for payments, which we hope the Council will take into consideration. We are therefore raising our request for payments to EUR 3 800 million.
In Heading 3 – Internal Policies – we are voting for EUR 9 012 million, we leave a zero margin and are voting for an amendment with asterisk. In any event – apart from the traditional horizontal amendments relating to performance facilities and improvements in execution – our fundamental intention in this heading is to hold very serious discussions with the Council on the funding of the Agencies.
Ladies and gentlemen, between 2000 and 2005 the number of decentralised Agencies has increased from 7 to 23 – this was Parliament’s idea; I remember the budgetary procedure during which we adopted it. The budgetary increase for the Agencies has risen from EUR 96 to 281 million and for the next 2005 budget we expect an increase of 20%. The number of staff posts for the Agencies has risen from 418 in 2000 to 2695. All of this has meant a reduction in the maximum limit for the heading of around EUR 134 million in order to fund other priorities. I cannot accept this situation and I intend to hold very serious negotiations with the Council.
For the purposes of the negotiation with this Parliament’s rapporteur for the Agencies – Mrs Haug – we have presented an amendment which affects all the Agencies and which represents a reduction of EUR 40 million, leaving the budget for them at the level of the 2004 budget. Our intention in this case is, firstly, to point out that the funding of any additional increase the Council intends for newly-established Agencies must be discussed with this Parliament, because with the financial straitjacket we are in, with the financial perspectives set from 2000 to 2006, this annual increase in the Agencies already has to be at the expense of Parliament’s priorities, and the Agencies are not Parliament’s only priority, although the Agencies do, of course, need to be funded and we are committed to that as well.
I would like to talk about pilot projects. We have already agreed on a package acceptable to the political groups. Some of them are extremely important, such as the pilot projects for small and medium-sized businesses, combating terrorism, nuclear arms reduction and conflict prevention. I believe we are producing a broad and ambitious package.
In a similar way, in terms of preparatory actions I would like to stress the parliamentary agreement on the voluntary return of immigrants, on aid in the fight against poverty-related diseases – for which we allocate EUR 10 million, which I believe constitutes significant financial support – and, furthermore, the new strategy we have employed of treating certain pilot projects as studies.
I would like, Mr President, to address a few words to the Commissioner, because today is her last day as a member of the European Commission. The Commissioner for Budgets always has a very difficult role to play between Parliament and the Council – two budgetary authorities which have no choice but to reach agreement, although on occasions it seems that agreement is a very long way off. The Commissioner is to a large extent responsible for the budgetary peace over recent years and I would, therefore, like to point out that, thanks to the agreements she and her team have presented at the last minute, we have managed to resolve certain complicated situations. I hope that she will be just as successful over the coming years in her new life beyond Brussels. In any event, I want you to know that it has been a pleasure for everybody involved in the budget to work with you.
Finally, in Heading 4 we have voted for EUR 5 119 million – plus an amendment with asterisk. What is basically happening in Heading 4 is that we are once again faced with having to fund Iraq. This funding was not scheduled for 2005 and what is being proposed is that we fund it at the expense of Parliament’s traditional priorities, like the external policy voted for by Parliament this year, the previous year and in 2000. This is not acceptable either. Taking account, therefore, of the suggestions of the Committee on Development and the Committee on Foreign Affairs, we have requested that this heading be funded with the new resources provided for in the Interinstitutional Agreement in the additional sum of EUR 190 million. At the same time we call in to question – or we place within the same package – the common foreign and security policy, which is very important to this Parliament, but its funding must be considered within the general framework of what needs to be funded in Heading 4.
Mr President, we are presenting a proposal which I hope will be voted for by a large majority of our fellow Members on Thursday and which will provide us with a serious position for negotiating with the Council, because I would insist that what we are taking into consideration are the political priorities this Parliament has set itself.
The patience and negotiating skills of the outgoing Commissioner – and of the new one, let us hope – are going to be required for this first reading of the European Parliament, because it is very different from the first reading by the Council.
As rapporteur and a veteran member of the Committee on Budgets for ten years, I am perfectly able to distinguish between the limits of what may be required and those of political reality. But this House has positions on certain items it will not relinquish. The reality is that the European Parliament is defending its priorities at a time when the budgetary situation is very difficult and very restrictive.
In general terms, we accept the Commission's preliminary draft budget as amended by the competent committees, the political groups and individual Members who have proposed amendments. You are already aware that there has been a technical adjustment to the maximum limits of Headings 3, 4 and 5, which in themselves create an almost insoluble problem in terms of achieving the figures for the 2004 budget.
Mr Mulder – rapporteur for the 2004 budget – did a brilliant budgetary job. I am trying to do the same thing this year, although I am aware that the financial resources available to me are less than last year.
The Council has cut internal policies by EUR 55 million from the preliminary draft budget, creating an impossible margin of EUR 108 million. The amendments which the honourable Members have presented to this draft budget, in this Heading 3 alone, represent more than EUR 350 million. And every single amendment is perfectly justified.
The Council has cut external policies by EUR 129 million in comparison with the Commission’s preliminary draft budget, leaving a margin of 14 million, when the negative margin in committee was EUR 115 million and that already seriously jeopardised Parliament’s traditional external priorities."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples