Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-01-19-Speech-3-091"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2000-01-19"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:VOTE2
dcterms:Language	"fr"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20000119.4.3-091"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2000-01-19-Speech-3-0922
lpv:speaker	lp:Georges Berthu2
lpv:spokenAs	unknown; Rassemblement pour la France (1999-07-20--2000-11-22)3 member; AFCO (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 substitute; ECON (1999-07-21--2001-01-30)3 vice-chair; Delegation for relations with Canada (1999-07-22--2002-01-14)3 member; UEN (1999-07-20--2000-09-20)3
lpv:translated text	"Madam President, this report proposed to give discharge to the Commission for the implementation of the general budget of the European Communities for the 1997 financial year, pursuant to Article 276 of the EC Treaty. The French Members of the Union for a Europe of Nations Group refused to vote in favour of this proposal. The discharge for 1997 was postponed by this House on 4 May. This was because the out-going Santer Commission, restricted to dealing with current matters, could not enter into the long-term commitments on reform which seemed necessary given the wealth of criticism from the Court of Auditors. The Prodi Commission has now effectively entered into these commitments and has already instigated several reforms. Does this mean that we should give the discharge? We should remember that the Court of Auditors’ report on the 1997 financial year was very critical and refused to provide the statement of assurance as to the reliability of the underlying transactions, as defined by Article 248 of the EC Treaty. Although stating that the commitment transactions seemed regular, the Court actually added the essential clarification that, as in previous years, the effect of the errors in the transactions underlying the payments of the Commission was so great that the Court could not provide assurance that these transactions were legal and regular. If the Court cannot provide its statement of assurance on the whole 1997 budget, why has this House decided to give its moral guarantee by giving the discharge? We are, of course, being told that the Commission is not the same. Yet, we would respond that the implementation of the 1997 budget is still the same. It has not changed in six months. Furthermore, the irregular underlying transactions are not wholly the responsibility of the Commission, for the Member States have often been involved in them."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph