Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-05-17-Speech-3-049"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2006-05-17"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:IIA on budgetary discipline and sound financial management – Conclusion of the IIA on budgetary discipline and sound financial management (debate)2
dcterms:Language	"lt"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20060517.3.3-049"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2006-05-17-Speech-3-0502
lpv:speaker	lp:Margarita Starkevičiūtė2
lpv:spokenAs	unknown; Liberalų ir centro sąjunga (2004-07-20--2009-07-13)3 substitute; BUDG (2004-07-22--2007-01-14)3 member; ECON (2004-07-21--2007-01-14)3 member; ALDE (2004-07-20--2009-07-13)3 member; Delegation for relations with Japan (2004-09-15--2007-03-13)3 substitute; Delegation for relations with Iran (2004-09-15--2007-03-13)3 member; CONT (2004-07-21--2007-01-14)3
lpv:translated text	"One of the ways the Member State Governments could stimulate the private initiative is to create an environment conducive to the growth of high quality economy. We must ask ourselves whether the interinstitutional agreement reached will contribute to the attainment of this objective. We can hardly answer this question because initially the agreement was reached when the Member States shared opinions at the dinner table and decided which programmes should be funded. Later the European Parliament joined the dinner table and attempted to adjust the agreement with regard to priorities defined by social programmes. Can we really assess the economic impact of an agreement reached in this way? I do not think so. Therefore, I believe the procedures for developing such projects should be regulated in a more strict and clear-cut way. First of all we must clearly define the responsibility of the Member States in respect of the general budget, that is, reform the own resources system. The Commission should say clearly that it supports this proposal and should say what it proposes and what it is doing, because at the moment there is a lot of uncertainty in this matter. The second important task is to actually define the criteria for each programme underlying the fund’s allocation. At present these criteria are of a very general character, on occasions overlap, and it is utterly unclear whether the funds, seemingly considerable amounts, will actually benefit the European citizens. The third thing, which definitely must be defined in each programme is the responsibility – that of the Member States for the European Union budget, citizens' responsibility for the use of the funds and the Commission's responsibility for the efficient, apparent and the transparent functioning of that system."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph