Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-03-12-Speech-2-025"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20020312.3.2-025"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, if we want to keep to the timetable for enlargement – which we all do – 2003 will be essentially characterised by the need to make preparations for enlargement. That has already been underlined in this House. In the candidate countries, assuming that negotiations have been concluded, 2003 will see the referendums being held, and, in the Member States, the processes of ratifying the Accession Treaties will be in progress, the Convention will be presenting its recommendations on Europe's future in an enlarged EU and the European institutions, their personnel and structures, will be having to make very real preparations for the increased membership after 2004, from which date they will exercise their responsibilities on behalf of a good many more people and on behalf of more Member States.
To return to preparations for enlargement, these mean for the institutions of the European Community definite additional human resources and tangible administrative measures. Taking just one of the tasks as an example, the Commission must, starting from the first day of enlargement, audit State aid in the candidate states. We also, of course, want participation in the Structural Fund or in the Agricultural Fund to work virtually from day one, so that there is no excessive time lag. This means in real terms that administrative reconstruction must start as early as in the run-up to enlargement.
The Commission is therefore proposing the creation of 500 non-permanent positions within itself. Why temporary staff? We would welcome the option of, as early as 2003, appointing staff from the candidate countries to serve in the Commission. Of course, we have to bear in mind the constrained position in category 5, that is, the area of administrative expenditure. On that, the Commission is in complete agreement with Mr Stenmarck's report, and we have therefore included in our proposal the suggestion that staff should be made available for the new political priorities by means of reassignment, which makes it absolutely necessary – on which point, too, we agree completely with Mr Stenmarck – that the report submitted by the Secretaries-General, which is on the table, should be checked exhaustively to see where savings might be possible.
The Commission has submitted the first such ‘screening’ and has nonetheless come to the conclusion that, in all probability, additional resources over and above category 5 will be required in 2003 in order to fund the measures in preparation for enlargement. I see the proposal that the flexibility reserve be used for this purpose as being wholly concordant with the wording of the interinstitutional agreement, dealing as it does with a temporary situation, that of no resources having been set aside in the Financial Plan for the European institutions to prepare themselves for enlargement. It is of course not acceptable to use the resources allocated to enlargement for that purpose in 2003. The Financial Plan does not permit it. I do think though that the peculiar situation in 2003 means that we should check closely whether the instrument of the flexibility reserve can be used in this way.
One last word on the flexibility reserve: use will be made of it in any case, as, when dealing with the 2002 Budget last year, we had agreed that the last tranche from the specific restructuring programme for the Spanish and Portuguese fishing fleets would be made available in 2003.
I think we are all aware that, just as in recent years, the European Budget will face fresh demands made on it in 2003, but I note – and this is something I would like to underline – that the priorities set out in Parliament's reports coincide to a marked degree with those set by the Commission. I am therefore working on the assumption that the budget procedure will again see us summoning up together the flexibility and willingness to compromise that we need in order to meet the challenges of 2003.
All three of the reports before us on priorities for 2003 are therefore right to highlight this essential task. I wish to thank the rapporteurs, Mr Färm and Mr Stenmarck, for these conclusive reports, which also lay very definite emphasis on this. On 27 February, the Commission decided on its priorities and annual strategy for 2003. In it, we agreed on three priorities: firstly, preparation for enlargement; secondly, measures to enhance stability and security in the European Union and also outside it; and thirdly, on the priority to be accorded to the promotion of sustainable economic development. The President of the Commission has already had the opportunity to present this strategy to Parliament, and there will be a plenary debate on it in the next part-session, in order that we may also discuss together the consequences this will have on the programme of legislation. We are focusing today on issues of budget planning and on the effects that the setting of priorities will have on them.
The maximum funding allocation for 2003 has been set by the Financial Plan at EUR 102 billion, precisely one third of which is laid down as being for structural assistance and for the principal support instruments that are at our disposal for the purpose of achieving the important objective of matching living conditions across regions, improving the employment situation, improved protection for the environment and the promotion of gender equality.
Most of the resources will, on the other hand, accrue to the sphere of agricultural policy, subject to the creation of the relevant legal basis. We will of course be presenting the agricultural policy's mid-term balance sheet in 2002, which will be linked with further proposals for reform, although I believe it rather too optimistic to assume that these proposals for reform will take tangible form as soon as the 2003 Budget; Agriculture Ministers are simply not in the habit of deciding on agricultural reforms at that speed.
In the context of the priorities set for 2003, therefore, new initiatives focus primarily on the policy areas of internal and foreign affairs. The Commission is proposing to make available an additional sum of approximately EUR 270 million in the coming year, that is, 2003, for these pressure points. Let me give the following as examples of what is proposed in the area of internal affairs policy: Firstly, redoubled efforts towards an integrated common civil protection strategy, for 11 September opened the eyes of all of us to how important this is as a task for the Community. Then new actions with additional resources in the area of the Refugee Fund and a programme from the area of sustainable development, and a programme for smart energy to continue previous support programmes in the energy sector with increased resources.
In the foreign policy field, as has indeed been our experience from the very beginning of this parliamentary term, greater demands will again be made on us. We will have to continue our commitment in the Balkans, in order – among other things – not to put at risk the successes we have already achieved, and, as a European Union, we will be taking on new tasks. To be precise, I refer here to the police operation in Bosnia-Herzegovina. It is the Commission's view that the international Police Task Force, at least as far as the operational costs of the joint operation are concerned, should be at least partly funded from the Community budget. That, again, is of course a new step. Mr Färm has pointed out, though, that it represents a new measure, but the Commission takes the view that it should also be seen to be a joint one. The Council conceded the highest priority in 2003 to the issue of how this operation should be financed, and I believe that all three institutions are agreed in principle, but we must of course also agree on the conditions, that is, on how the resources from the common foreign and security policy are to be provided. What, though, can of course very well happen with further measures for 2003 in the common foreign and security policy area is that the resources in category 4, that is, in the foreign policy budget, will be insufficient to cover further measures for civil crisis management, and so it is my urgent appeal to the budgetary authority that they speedily examine the Commission proposal on the creation of a new financial instrument. I think we should, in the coming months, as a matter of priority, discuss what ideas the budgetary authority have as regards further development of the budget line for the common foreign and security policy.
On foreign policy, I would further like to mention that we have promised Afghanistan that we will make aid available for the reconstruction of the country. This year, in 2003, and in the years to come, the people who, for 20 years, have lived through war and suffered oppression by the Taliban, will be in urgent need of aid. This will continue to be a priority for the next few years.
Still on foreign policy, I would like to mention that we – or so, at any rate, I hope – will, in 2003, be faced with a new task in respect of Cyprus. Any political solution that we manage to bring about there will of course need to be backed up by financial resources. Let me remind the House that the budget for assistance with preparations for enlargement includes only resources for the southern part of Cyprus and not for the northern part. This, too, will confront us with a new challenge.
The Commission is also proposing, as overseas aid, to make a further contribution to the Global Health Fund. It takes the view that its commitment to support the Barcelona process in the Mediterranean region should be reinforced, in particular by more offers of funding for the development of the private sector. The Commission has therefore proposed to the Council the significant possibility of establishing a subsidiary of the European Investment Bank, and has already made provision in the Budget for a capital investment of EUR 25 million."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples