Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-05-03-Speech-3-168"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20000503.10.3-168"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, the Commission proposes that the existing regulation be extended. According to the regulation, the Commission is obliged to prepare an annual evaluation for Parliament and the Council, something it has not done. However, the programme must not be halted under any circumstances; that would be quite wrong. It is important that the programme should be extended, but not before we have seen the evaluations. The Commission promised that we would have the evaluations in March, then in April and then in May. So where have they got to? An independent evaluation is needed for otherwise we have no guarantees that the money has been spent properly. The purpose of the evaluation is, of course, to improve the future programmes. Everything concerning development aid, including the rehabilitation of refugees, ought to fall within the remit of the Directorate-General for Development. It is this Directorate-General which has the expertise and it should therefore also have the responsibility. The Court of Auditors has also criticised the lack of clarity in the way the different initiatives are related to one other. It is indefensible and damaging to the programme that no effort is being made to introduce coherence. I am glad that there is support, especially in the Committee on Budgetary Control, for my amendment to the effect that the programme should only be extended once the Commission has fulfilled its part of the agreement and submitted annual reports and evaluations. Without this amendment, the Commission could get away with not having submitted a single evaluation report since the regulation came into force in 1997. I have also noted that my dear friend, Mr Dell'Alba, has had his grumbles printed as an appendix to my opinion. However, he is only speaking for himself. At any rate, he had no backing in the Committee, since he was the only one to vote against the conclusions."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples