Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-04-03-Speech-2-109"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20010403.6.2-109"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
In our view, the reports on the main guidelines for the 2002 budget of the European institutions seem to be incomplete, or vague, in three main areas.
Firstly
Additional agricultural expenditure will be necessary, as a result of the BSE crisis, which will be substantial; however we quite rightly do not wish to revise the whole financial perspective adopted in 1999. How can we reconcile these two requirements? According to the reports, we would have to do our best to find the money through an internal readjustment of heading 1 (agriculture), which, in our view, is impossible in light of the commitments that have been given. As we already stated during the recent debate in this House on the revision of the 2001 budget, we hope that a greater contribution to heading 2 (structural operations) might be considered.
Secondly
. The 2002 budget guidelines seem too sketchy on the cost of enlargement. The implications for agriculture or for the Structural Funds have not yet been determined, but will become clear in time. On the other hand, we must now start to consider the financial consequences for the operations of the European institutions. They should form part of a multiannual plan building up to enlargement, beginning in 2002.
The third area is the
. Political statements have been made in various quarters, claiming that the Treaty of Nice should be ratified by all Member States at the end of 2001. Furthermore, the ECSC protocol, as an annex to the Treaty, is due to come into force in July 2002. We are dubious as to whether this timetable will be respected, but since this commitment seems to have been made, the 2002 budget guidelines should at least contain an estimate of how much the new provisions of this Treaty will cost. Yet, this is missing. This expenditure is, however, likely to be substantial, whether it involves, for example, a unified statute for MEPs, funding of the so-called ‘European political parties’ from the Community budget, or even this very budget assuming the administrative costs of the rapid action force, pursuant to Article 28(2) of the EU Treaty. As usual, we are going to make Member States ratify the new provisions, the cost of which we are trying hard to conceal."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
"Treaty of Nice"1
"agriculture."1
"enlargement"1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples