Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-10-24-Speech-2-234"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2000-10-24"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:2001 budget procedure (continuation)2
dcterms:Language	"fi"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20001024.7.2-234"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2000-10-24-Speech-2-2352
lpv:speaker	lp:Esko Seppänen2
lpv:spokenAs	unknown; Vasemmistoliitto (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 substitute; BUDG (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 member; Delegation to the EU-Russia Parliamentary Cooperation Committee (1999-09-29--2002-01-14)3 member_of_the_bureau; EUL/NGL (1999-10-13--2004-07-19)3 member; Committee on Industry, External Trade, Research and Energy (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 substitute; CONT (2000-05-03--2002-01-14)3 substitute; Delegation to the EU-Estonia Joint Parliamentary Committee (1999-09-29--2002-01-14)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, the European Union’s budget for next year has been prepared in difficult circumstances. That is the fault of the Council. The problems are the same as last year. The previous European Parliament made this Interinstitutional Agreement, which was binding on this Parliament, a couple of months prior to the commencement of this parliamentary term, and it specified too low a ceiling for category 4 expenditure. Then it was not known that the Council and the Commission would be promising aid for the reconstruction of Serbia and Kosovo, to come out of this money. The political commitments made to the forces of opposition in the area of the former Yugoslavia must now be redeemed. In this particular case that means revising the ceiling for category 4. If the Council does not agree to that, Parliament will have to terminate the Interinstitutional Agreement on so-called budgetary discipline. New money is needed in the budget for Serbia and Kosovo. It is not right that the assistance to the poor in the area of Yugoslavia should be paid for by the poor in the area of the Mediterranean, Russia or other poor countries, although the Council would have it that that is precisely how we should go about matters. I would like to focus attention on the fact that there seem to be sufficient amounts of European Union money for financing political parties at European level, but not, for example, for the prevention of unemployment. I am astonished at the proposal that Europarty support should be paid for out of the Commission’s article in category 3. That would mean that the Europarties would be getting support twice over. If they have not hesitated before to misappropriate the European Parliament’s resources to finance their own work, we can only imagine that they are continuing to do so, although they might be receiving subsidies from the Commission. Or does someone believe that the Europarties are being made to pay rent to Parliament or pay for their own communications costs here? Our group takes a mainly dim view of Europarty support and its abuse in the future."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph