Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/1999-11-17-Speech-3-103"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"1999-11-17"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Vote2
dcterms:Language	"nl"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.19991117.4.3-103"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:1999-11-17-Speech-3-1042
lpv:speaker	lp:Anne Van Lancker2
lpv:spokenAs	substitute; Delegation to the EU-Turkey Joint Parliamentary Committee (1999-10-08--2002-01-14)3 vice-chair; Committee on Women's Rights and Equal Opportunities (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 member; Delegation for relations with South-east Europe (1999-10-06--2002-01-14)3 unknown; Socialistische Partij (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 member; EMPL (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 member; PES (1999-07-20--2000-03-07)3 substitute; Committee on Citizens' Freedoms and Rights, Justice and Home Affairs (1999-07-22--2002-01-14)3
lpv:translated text	"In principle, I am of the opinion that the own resources decision should be based on equivalence and fairness between the Member States who all should play according to the same rules. This is why I am rather disgruntled about the decisions reached by the European Council of Berlin, with Europe as the big loser. The requirement that the Member States should be treated equally should be embodied in the present proposal from the Commission. The starting point of the Haug report was that the position of March last, namely that all exemption provisions should be dispensed with, should now be substantiated. Amendment 31, part 2, and amendment 32, however, mitigate this position with the addition of the term “from now on”. In other words, the Member States can keep what they managed to secure in Berlin for now. The purport of Amendments Nos 12 and 33 is to revise the collection costs down to 10% with regard to the amounts established after 31 December 2000, which can be supplemented by a flexible premium as a function of the results achieved by the Member States when collecting the traditional own resources and fraud control measures. I agree with this, in principle. The Member States must assume responsibility for collecting their traditional own resources. What does rather disturb me is the impact that this amendment has on the decisions taken at the European Council of Berlin. Berlin was a compromise which managed to accommodate every Member State. In order to compensate both Belgium and the Netherlands for the additional cost which ensued from the gradual replacement of the VAT contribution in favour of the GNP contribution, the collection costs were increased to 25%. This concession is now cancelled whilst the other benefits are maintained. In this way, a new inequality is created to the detriment of two Member States, namely Belgium and the Netherlands. As such, I voted against these two amendments."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph