Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-01-18-Speech-2-288"
Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
---|---|
rdf:type | |
dcterms:Date | |
dcterms:Is Part Of | |
dcterms:Language | |
lpv:document identification number |
"en.20000118.9.2-288"2
|
lpv:hasSubsequent | |
lpv:speaker | |
lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, rapporteur, ladies and gentlemen, I hope that I am able to answer the question as to whether we deserve to have the discharge granted in the affirmative. It is, of course, the discharge procedure for the budget, together with the report from the Court of Auditors, that act as a source of information for the tax payers of the European Union as to whether, and to what extent, budgetary funds were spent thriftily and in accordance with political priorities, where errors occurred, but, above all, what kind of measures are being introduced to remedy the situation.
The fight against fraud must be stepped up still further. We briefly discussed OLAF this morning. I would just like to again mention the staffing increase for which provision has been made in Budget 2000. Mrs Stauner, the complaint I referred to this morning has not only just been announced, in fact it has already been submitted. I believe this also testifies to the fact that the Commission is not prepared to tolerate certain institutions wanting to back out of this regulation, which was passed by Parliament and the Council, rather it applies equally to every single one of the institutions of the European Community.
Finally, you call for dialogue to be improved; more dialogue with the Member States about necessary improvements in those areas where they have the power of decision over Community funds. I also second your demands on this point and will see to it that the Commission does what it can to have them implemented.
As far as the issues surrounding the Gaza hospital and the Palestinian Parliament are concerned, I am able to tell you that the Gaza hospital will be open and available to out-patients as of 15 July and to in-patients from 15 October 2000. Secondly, the Commission will inform the European Parliament about the progress made in relation to the hospital and in relation to the selection of the consultants who are to prepare the invitations to tender for the construction of the Palestinian Parliament.
All the reform measures I have mentioned are part of a global approach. Mr Kinnock is to present the global approach to you on behalf of the Commission and will talk about political priorities of this period of office and enlarge upon the need for firm and, above all, verifiable and comprehensible scheduling.
Implementation of these plans should make the European Union and its institutions, by and large, more powerful and transparent. Parliament’s task is to supervise the activities of the Commission, particularly within the framework of the discharge procedure. The Commission is very well aware of how resolutely and scrupulously the European Parliament is exercising this supervision. All the more reason for me to be pleased that the reform measures we have introduced meet with your approval and that you are prepared to form a positive judgement of the discharge procedure for 1997.
The general public knows that the European Parliament is not treating the discharge procedure as a routine matter but is giving it every attention, and the Commission has also been aware of this since last year, when discharge was denied, which is what led to the resignation of the previous Commission. Therefore, today’s debate on the discharge of the 1997 budget signals the end of a long process. It has dealt with virtually all the important issues that the Commission is concerned with in the broader sense.
Mrs van der Laan’s report addresses all these instruments. The report is very ambitious. It focuses on the reform measures that were introduced and, above all, on those that will need to be introduced. The Commission shares the rapporteur’s ambitious approach. I would like, Mrs van der Laan, to congratulate you on what is indeed a very ambitious report.
I would now like to look more closely at a number of points contained in the report. Firstly, the issue that rightly occupies a substantial amount of our time, that of externalisation of tasks. We have debated this at great length in committee and also in the framework of the budgetary procedure for the year 2000. The Commission has promised Parliament that it will introduce measures in this regard in the very near future.
Foreign policy is the area that has most relevance to that of the Technical Assistance Offices. My fellow Commissioner, Mr Chris Patten, together with the other Commissioners responsible for foreign policy, set up a review group, only at the end of last year, which is to undertake a very swift analysis of the tasks performed by the current Technical Assistance Offices and consider which of the tasks should be carried out in a different form in future.
The group has undertaken to submit specific foreign policy proposals shortly after submitting the global reform package. The Commission is unlikely to be able to submit a detailed proposal on this specific point as early as 31 March, but we hope to be able to do so very soon thereafter.
You emphasised the global approach in your report. This global approach is part of the reform package. However, I also wanted to mention that concrete measures are being prepared which are in line with the report by Mr Bourlanges and which are specifically intended for this sphere of foreign policy.
It is the aim of other demands in the report to increase transparency. Again, I can assure you that, as such, you have picked up on one of the Commission’s reform objectives. The Commission wants openness and believes that it should only refuse your Chamber access to information where there is a need to preserve interests meriting protection. I am confident that it will be possible to resolve these issues in the interinstitutional agreement.
The Commission also intends to improve the information content of your accounts, above and beyond existing legal requirements, at your request and that of the Court of Auditors. I undertook, back in the debate on the Court of Auditors’ report, to take up this point, which also features in this report – namely, carrying out a systematic follow-up – because I consider it to be necessary. The Commission has already decided, on the basis of my submission, that the auditors are to take responsibility for looking after the accounts, including those for 1999, in such a way that they take on board the Court of Auditors’ criticism; that is to say, advance payments are to be itemised separately, so as to keep this information to hand."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples