Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/1999-10-26-Speech-2-043"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.19991026.2.2-043"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, Madam President-in-Office of the Council, Commissioner, I think we are heading for some difficult debates given that Parliament is pretty much agreed – even my group – that we oppose the across-the-board 10% cuts in funding. We would like to thank Mr Bourlanges for his preliminary work, even though we certainly envisage the need to amend some points of the negotiations. It has already been mentioned by Mr Mulder that there must still be a critical review of expenditure on Kosovo, of the assessment of expenditure on Kosovo. As a group, we also consider that there must also be a critical review of the fisheries agreement. In these areas also we must ensure more efficiency, more ecological principles. There are some points where a critical review may be necessary, e.g. the export agreement with Japan. Nevertheless, we believe that additional tasks – and in this case many additional tasks would pass to the European budget – must also mean additional funds being allocated. We therefore need a critical review of the Financial Perspective. We would like to thank the Commissioner for intimating this. In any case, we are prepared to cooperate constructively in this matter. We think that Kosovo can certainly be financed with fresh funds, but we consider that the other points – Turkey, the fisheries agreement, etc. –must be financed by the budget for the current appropriations.
However, Parliament has also clearly shown in today’s debate that it is increasingly aware of its responsibility, not just insofar as concerns the effective use of funds, but also the discharging of funds. It is not just a matter of introducing new budget lines and critically reviewing whether all the budget lines can be used correctly and effectively; it is also about ensuring during the course of the year that the programmes are run properly. We are also responsible for this. I hope that these were not just isolated declarations today, but that in the coming year Parliament will also assume the responsibility of critically reviewing in all the Committees whether the appropriated funds are also being discharged properly.
I would like to briefly address another subject that has also been mentioned here and which will be important. We must, in order to increase trust in the European institutions, also increase the efficiency of parliamentary work itself. In this regard, we have already heard several key points today. Firstly, it is a matter of swiftly developing a Members’ Statute, an Assistants’ Statute. Also, and here I am opposing some of the previous speakers – it is a matter of developing a European Parties’ Statute since I think that, in the area of party financing at European level also, we need more transparency, more efficiency. The voters must know what funds are available in these areas. This, of course, requires that we clearly define what a European Party is and what sort of work is done at European level. It also, of course, requires that we critically and precisely determine what in this case the term “European area” means. How far does the European Union’s coordinating task go? It cannot just be about the EU. It must also cover enlargement in the east. Funds must also be made available for this. But in all these areas we need more transparency.
Finally, one more area in which I think that Parliament must also do its homework properly is the whole question of estate management. Here, in my opinion, mistakes have been made in the past. We must therefore ensure that in future the monies in this area are used much more efficiently and purposefully!"@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples