Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-12-12-Speech-2-038"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20001212.3.2-038"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, my thanks first and foremost to Florence Parly, who is just leaving but who, I think, is still within earshot. After the experiences of last year, I think she has created a very good atmosphere, both here and in the Council, with the active commitment which she has shown throughout her presidency. I should also like to thank Mrs Schreyer, who has continued to help us with her highly constructive approach and, of course, my friend Jutta Haug, who has done an excellent job, not forgetting Joan Colom i Naval and Markus Ferber.
We are now at the point at which we must decide whether or not we can vote in favour of this budget next Thursday. Obviously we need to take a very close look at it and this is exactly what Parliament in general and we Social Democrats in particular intend to do. We believe that we managed to do a great deal of good during the discussions, both retaining and extending crucial priorities. With unemployment still at over 8% throughout Europe, the European Union needs to use the budget at its disposal to send out a clear message and to set about fighting this scourge in the economy to our citizens, which is why it is important that we have this 450 million at our disposal next year, starting with 100 million this year. It shows people that we take their problems seriously and are doing something about them.
I am delighted that we have managed in Category IV of this budget to show those living in the greatest need or in the process of democratising their countries throughout the world that this European Parliament and this European Union has not forgotten them, even if we have our own problems to resolve, and that here too we are making sure that there is enough money to go round. It is important for the people in the Balkans to understand, following the long period of hostilities during which our side presented a united front, that they can also rely on us when it comes to reconstruction. There are people sitting in this House who are at pains to ensure that the money needed will in fact be provided as and when it is needed and that flowery words will be accompanied by specific actions.
So I think that, along with much else which there is too little time to mention, we have a great deal to be pleased about. We have also passed a number of resolutions containing instructions. Allow me to say to the Commission, by way of example, that we have agreed to the 400 additional posts because we want to improve how various programmes are implemented, because we want you to be able to work better than you have been able to do in the past. But we also say in no uncertain terms that this implies a responsibility and a commitment on your part, because we shall be watching over you throughout this process. We shall be checking up, we shall be in contact with you and we shall be keeping tabs on what is happening, ensuring that there really has been an improvement before we are prepared to go even further with you.
It is also a commitment vis-à-vis the Council. I have a couple of questions to put to the Council – not that I am questioning the compromise. But should we really have to try year after year to see what is left over from the previous year, what can be carried over to provide enough money for regions such as Serbia and the Balkans? Should we really have to check first and see what is left over? Is our message to these people: we will give you what is left over and then we shall see if we can add anything to it? Should that be our message? No it should not!
By refusing to discuss the specific long-term aspects of this challenge with us, you have brought the whole spirit of the Interinstitutional Agreement into question. You keep saying that the financial perspective is sacrosanct as far as you are concerned. But the Interinstitutional Agreement between the three institutions is also a valuable item and should help us to achieve joint planning security. The Balkans and other regions need planning security. Repeated use of the flexibility instrument also contradicts the Interinstitutional Agreement, because it was an instrument which this European Parliament secured in order to pay for contingencies and so that it could let it run up to EUR 600 million. It was never meant to be used for firefighting every year in areas which we have to fund in any case. You are undermining the Interinstitutional Agreement and let me assure you that we shall consider whether or not we intend to have a part in this next year."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples