Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-10-24-Speech-2-132"

PredicateValue (sorted: default)
rdf:type
dcterms:Date
dcterms:Is Part Of
dcterms:Language
lpv:document identification number
"en.20001024.5.2-132"2
lpv:hasSubsequent
lpv:speaker
lpv:spokenAs
lpv:translated text
"Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, the budgets of the European Parliament, the Council, the Court of Justice, the Economic and Social Committee, the Committee of the Regions and the Ombudsman, are purely administrative budgets. However, they provide an insight into how the policies of individual European institutions are translated into concrete action. The European Court of Auditors is giving us the least cause for concern at present. The Court of Auditors has honoured the commitments it made of its own volition years ago. That is why we have released the funds required for the extension of the building of the Court of Auditors. However, I would also expressly like to point out that we will make very sure that total spending remains within the target of EUR 25 million at 1998 prices. I believe the European Court of Justice is the one institution that will understand why we should want to keep a suitably close eye on this. The biggest problem we face at the moment is the hold-ups that have occurred within the translation service of the European Court of Justice. The consequences of this are no longer to be tolerated, because proceedings at the European Court of Justice now take an average of almost two years, simply because the translation services are no longer able to keep up with the work. Therefore, with effect from the new year, we intend to make a substantial contribution to reducing this translation backlog. But here too, we will monitor very closely whether any real improvement takes place in the situation at the European Court of Justice. Should this prove not to be the case, we will be forced to take further measures, which will certainly be less kind than those we are proposing for the 2001 financial year The Economic and Social Committee is still a real problem child. We want this committee to retain its viability, but it pays the least attention to Parliament’s demands as part of the budgetary authority. This is a situation that cannot be allowed to continue. We do not just make resolutions to please all those involved, they are supposed to have an impact on the financial management of all the institutions. The Economic and Social Committee must get its own house in order if it wants to avoid jeopardising its continued existence for good. I hope that this issue will be tackled courageously over the next few months. I also hope that the Nice Summit will send out a clear signal in this respect. But it is this committee, in particular, that has follow-up work to do here. The Committee of the Regions is currently giving less cause for concern. Things are not running quite as smoothly as we imagine them to be there either. This is another area where our resolutions should be treated with due respect. A better system is called for, particularly where promotion policy is concerned. However, as I understand it, one is currently being prepared. That being the case, I believe we will be in a position to approve the necessary promotions within the Committee of the Regions. Finally, we also handle the Ombudsman’s budget. We could be relatively restrained here because the Council has in fact already arranged for all the necessary measures to be taken, so that all we have to do in this round is confirm them. With your permission, I would like to make two closing comments. It seems to me to be very dangerous to work for one particular institution, because the sickness record is disproportionately high there. Naturally we will have to examine, on the basis of these reports, what measures need to be taken to improve the state of health of the staff in this institution – and I am not talking about Parliament or the Commission – for whom we do, after all, have a special responsibility. Secondly, we suggest that the budgets of both data protection officers – that of the Commission and that of the officer provided for under the Schengen Agreement – should be given separate sections, so that the rights of the budgetary authority are fully upheld and transparency is duly assured on an ongoing basis. The comprehensive set of figures that I have put before you today, in my capacity as rapporteur, is something to be proud of. I would be delighted if you could support the Committee on Budget’s proposals when it comes to Thursday’s vote. As your rapporteur, I have made three guidelines central to my deliberations. Firstly – and this applies to all public budgets – we must make responsible and economical use of our taxpayers’ money. Secondly, we must be prepared for the major challenge of enlargement in terms of staffing; in other words, we must now create the financial leeway we need to be able to rise to this challenge when the time comes. Thirdly, at the end of the day, the taxpayers must get added value for their money. Only then will the European institutions do justice to their task. Following in-depth discussions with the relevant institutions and the honourable Members, whom I would like to thank most sincerely for their excellent and friendly cooperation, I am able to put before you today a draft budget that fully accords with these three guidelines. With a total of EUR 980 million, the European Parliament’s budget, which I am submitting today, is the largest individual budget. My efforts were directed at developing delegates’ working conditions in such a way as to enable us to master the new challenges in our work arising from the Treaty of Amsterdam. This Parliament represents the people of Europe. We are the only institution in Europe that can claim this with complete justification. Hence the administration of this House is there to serve the delegates, and not vice versa. I believe that through this budget, we have succeeded in turning this consideration into figures and using it to good effect. Scientific preliminary work is one area in particular where there is still plenty of room for improvement in our work. I hope that the administration will take this up over the next few months and work towards a solution. We upheld the demands of Parliament’s Bureau as regards the establishment plan, in so far as this could be justified by the Committee on Budgets. Also, in light of the fact that Parliament now has a transparent promotion system, which rewards on the basis of merit and not just according to length of service in a post, we approved all the announced promotions. The Committee on Budgets supported the necessary increases in funding in the sphere of information technology, especially with regard to data security – where there is a great deal of room for improvement in this House – as well as the increases needed for enhancing the security of our buildings and of all those who work there, and for the legal service. One point I would like to make very clear is that when it comes to the buildings policy, we are suffering the effect of increased interest rates. In fact we are directly linked to the interest rate set by the European Central Bank, which is why we have proposed that we should pursue the buildings policy already adopted, because this will help to release us from this burden of interest as soon as possible. I would like to take this opportunity to expressly thank the Vice-President, Mr Gerhard Schmid, who is responsible for budgetary issues, for his constructive cooperation. I believe that we succeeded, in the course of the conciliation negotiations between the Bureau of the European Parliament and the Committee on Budgets, in submitting a well-balanced draft. We have made no change to the Council Budget, as per the agreement between Parliament and the Council. However, I would also like to take this opportunity to make the Council aware that the Council Budget is a purely administrative budget too. The Council would do well to ensure that that is how things remain in future, particularly in the sphere of foreign and security policy. Programme expenditure has no place in the Council Budget. It must be provided for in the Commission Budget on a permanent basis. Being one arm of the budgetary authority, we will continue to keep tabs on this."@en1
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata

Named graphs describing this resource:

1http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/English.ttl.gz
2http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/Events_and_structure.ttl.gz
3http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/spokenAs.ttl.gz

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph