Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-12-12-Speech-2-024"

PredicateValue (sorted: default)
rdf:type
dcterms:Date
dcterms:Is Part Of
dcterms:Language
lpv:document identification number
"en.20001212.3.2-024"2
lpv:hasSubsequent
lpv:speaker
lpv:translated text
". Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, unlike the negotiations in Nice, a substantial result was achieved on the 2001 budget in a single joint night sitting. Unlike Nice, all three institutions – the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission – are, I think, well pleased with the final result. Ladies and gentlemen, with the new outbreak of BSE in cattle, immediate action was also required in the budgetary area in order to protect health and consumers and help the farmers affected. The budget being voted on today includes EUR 6 billion to subsidise beef production, in addition to the EUR 60 million budgeted in order to cofinance BSE tests. The agricultural ministers meeting in emergency session have proposed new measures in the wake of the BSE crisis, but we are all agreed that it makes no sense to postpone the resolution on the budget in order to include these new measures and that a supplementary budget will be submitted post haste in order to fund the necessary measures. A considerable amount of money will be needed, which is why I think that the Ecofin Council needs to address the budgetary consequences as a matter of urgency, because there are still points at which there is a discrepancy between our claims, or what we have in mind, and the funds at our disposal. Plus – and this was again stressed in Nice – we have to comply with the financial regulations and ceilings for the agricultural budget. Here we are in the peculiar situation of having even less room for manoeuvre because of the change in exchange rates. I was therefore most annoyed when the agricultural ministers, whilst fully aware of the BSE situation, rushed and served themselves from Christmas tables piled high with fruit and vegetables, bananas and nuts which required a total of 85 million in increased subsidies. I think that when a new emergency arises – and with the BSE crisis new priorities obviously need to be set in the agricultural budget – then certain consequences also apply and clear resolutions need to be taken and the core issues defined for the agricultural budget, which does, after all, total EUR 44 billion. As the Commissioner responsible for the budget, I am completely behind the emergency action which needs to be decided, including support for the beef market, but the fact that we subsidise beef production to the tune of EUR 6 billion on the one hand and must now pay out thousands of millions to subsidise its destruction is proof positive, in my opinion, of the urgent need for action in the whole agricultural policy sector. I trust that the European Parliament will support me here. Several decisions taken at Nice are highly relevant to the budget and the budgetary process. All the institutions will have their work cut out here. All the more reason to rejoice in the fact that negotiations on the 2001 budget were conducted in such a good atmosphere and led to such good results and, on behalf of the Commission, I should like thank everyone involved. It provides a good basis for Community policy next year; to be honest, the Community approach has been most productive throughout the year, throughout all the preliminary discussions and, on behalf of the Commission, I really must thank you and your colleagues, Mrs Parly; you proved to be a very skilled midwife at the birth of this 2001 budget and focused the debates and negotiations on the core issues. I should also like to thank the rapporteur, Mrs Haug, for her highly original combination of total determination and willingness to negotiate which culminated in this good result. I should also like to thank the rapporteurs, Mr Ferber and Mr Colom i Naval, the chairman of the Committee on Budgets, Mr Wynn, and the members of the Committee on Budgets for being so committed. It was thanks to their commitment that negotiations were brought to such a successful conclusion. The 2001 budget which we now have before us gives us funds of EUR 96.2 billion for new commitments next year and EUR 92.6 billion for payments. That translates into a rate of increase in the budget, as you pointed out, of 3.1 and 3.5% in comparison with the previous year, roughly in line with the rate of increase in the national budgets. One very important point is that the total budget only accounts for 1.06% of the joint European gross national product and, in terms of expenditure ratios, is lower than this year's budget. This illustrates that we have applied budgetary discipline, but it also illustrates that the financial planning concept decided in Berlin, i.e. that expenditure for the current Member States is being cut back in order to find room to fund enlargement, is being taken into account and is working. However, we must also note that the figures before us today do not include the supplementary budget which still needs to be addressed in the wake of the BSE crisis. I shall come back to that in a moment. First: what is so special about the 2001 budget? In the Commission's view, it is the fact that the second pillar of agricultural policy, namely promoting rural development, shows the highest rate of increase at 10%. I think this is worth mentioning because it means that we have a total of EUR 4.5 billion at our disposal. I really must disagree with the chairman of the Committee on Agriculture, who stated recently in a newspaper interview that this amounted to no more than a toothpick, never mind a second pillar, because this fails to do justice to the size of the sum in question: 4.5 billion is a considerable sum of money – it is almost as much as we have for the whole of foreign policy and the size of this sum and this ratio need to be highlighted. We really can say, in foreign policy, that the policy of the European Union is having a huge effect, even with this budget, and I am positive that it is thanks to Community policy that we now have democratisation in the Balkans and a chance, hopefully, of stability in the near future. I am positive that no such success would have been possible with the old concept of bilateral friendships, with Member States being played off against each other. It is the outcome of Community policy and it is therefore excellent that we have again managed to include EUR 839 million in the 2001 budget for the Balkans. It was no easy task, but we managed thanks to the agreed use of the flexibility reserve, which was used to provide funds over and above the sum provided for or decided in Nice as a basis for the Balkan policy – namely a total of EUR 4.65 billion over the period up to 2006. In providing the EUR 200 million emergency package, the Union has also proven that it is perfectly able to act quickly and take full account of its foreign policy responsibilities. What is important is that no country in the Balkans will now be offered less aid than originally planned before developments in Serbia due to the democratisation of Serbia. I think it is also important to signal that we fully support the new potential for cooperation which has arisen at last. I should like at this point to take the opportunity to thank Mr Kouchner for his splendid work in Kosovo; we were also able to provide huge support here from our budgetary resources. The process of reforming the Commission is also extremely important, particularly with a view to good financial management. Good financial management needs sufficient, well-qualified staff. Allow me at this point, on behalf of the Commission, to thank the budgetary authority for its support and for approving 400 new posts. You have linked this with a call for a concerted effort to bring about improvements, especially in areas in which financial support programmes have been implemented late or badly and I can assure you, ladies and gentlemen – especially you Mr Elles – that the Commission will do everything it can to improve its past record on the implementation of financial programmes. But let us not delude ourselves: we need both good financial management and the corresponding means of payment if we are to eliminate outstanding commitments. Nearly a third of the budget is set aside for structural policy, in order to help regions in economic difficulty overcome their problems and make up economic ground, especially through the Cohesion Fund. The Court of Auditors recently confirmed in a special report that this objective is being achieved and that the money from the Cohesion Fund is being put to good use. Here the Community is demonstrating solidarity by using Community funds to provide real support for economic development and it goes without saying that the regions and countries which are now on the receiving end of our solidarity will be prepared in the future to demonstrate their solidarity with the new countries, as and when we enlarge the European Union."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

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

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph