Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-09-03-Speech-2-177"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20020903.7.2-177"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
"I have the honour, on behalf of the Presidency of the Council, to present the 2003 draft budget of the European Communities, prepared by the Council on 22 July.
A common understanding was also reached to the effect that the restructuring of the Spanish and Portuguese fishing fleets should be financed and that the growth rate for the global appropriations for payments should be kept as low as possible.
Allow me firstly to say a few words about the administrative expenditure for 2003. The agreement reached by the two branches of the budget authority in July is a sound one.
The Council and the European Parliament acknowledge that the institutions must prepare themselves for enlargement of the EU in 2003. This will involve additional administrative expenditure. For example, there will be need for more staff and more space. By means of the agreement entered into, we have attached importance to securing funding for the pre-enlargement measures that are necessary for the individual institutions.
At the same time, there is agreement that the ceiling for the administrative expenditure in 2003 should be retained. The flexibility instrument must not be used.
The two branches of the budget authority have agreed that, in particular, pre-enlargement expenditure intended to be applied in 2003 may, as far as is possible, be applied as early as this year. This will make it easier for the institutions to prepare for enlargement. For the moment, the purpose of this frontloading exercise is to finance the publication of the Community’s body of laws in the languages of the new Member States. In this connection, there will, among other things, be a need to adopt an additional supplementary and amending budget for 2002.
By means of an agreement reached as early as in July, the institutions will acquire the best possible basis for planning as they prepare for enlargement.
The agreement will secure a calmer atmosphere surrounding both the European Parliament’s and the Council’s budgets for 2003. Moreover, it is a good thing that we are agreed about following up the opportunities for increased interinstitutional cooperation indicated by the secretaries-general of the institutions in a series or reports. A solution has also been found to the issue of the early retirement of employees of the European Parliament’s political groups.
Both Parliament and the Council accord high priority to the EU’s participation in external actions, that is to say the common foreign and security policy. The European Union should have adequate resources for being able at any time to carry out the tasks consequent upon our position in the international community. As I am quite sure MEPs agree, it is a question of the EU’s credibility.
At the consultation meeting in July, the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission agreed that, when required by the circumstances, the emergency aid reserve for humanitarian aid may also be used for civil crisis management. It was also agreed that an attempt should be made to enter into an agreement concerning the appropriations to the common foreign and security policy. This must happen as part of an overall agreement concerning the 2003 budget. We must secure the appropriations to the CFSP in 2003 in the light of new and essential tasks. We also concur about seeking an agreement concerning how best to involve Parliament in CFSP arrangements within the framework of the Treaty. It is heartening that such good results have already been achieved in this field.
In its draft budget, the Commission has set aside an amount of EUR 40 million to the CFSP. In this way, preparation has been made for taking over the policing mission in Bosnia-Herzegovina. The Council welcomes this appropriation but believes that the overall appropriations are inadequate. The Council therefore proposes a total appropriation for the common foreign and security policy of EUR 47.5 million for 2003. Above and beyond the policing mission in Bosnia-Herzegovina, the Council foresees, for example, measures involving specialist assistance to third countries in the fight against terrorism. Moreover, there is a need for more appropriations for non-proliferation and disarmament measures.
Both as Minister for European Affairs and former Member of the European Parliament, I am very pleased to note that the budget procedure for 2003 has so far been characterised by sound cooperation between the Council and the European Parliament. In the draft budget I am about to present, account has already been taken of a series of agreements and common understandings resulting from the consultation meeting between the Council and Parliament on 19 July 2002.
I hope we can reach agreement on something corresponding to the Council’s proposal.
I shall touch briefly upon the Commission’s proposal to use the flexibility instrument for providing funding to the tune of EUR 27 million for restructuring the Spanish and Portuguese fishing fleets. In this area, both the European Parliament and the Council have undertaken to find a solution before the close of the budget procedure. In the Council’s view, the flexibility instrument should only be used in extraordinary circumstances. On the issue of providing EUR 27 million by way of funding, the Council believes that all possible methods of funding should be investigated before consideration is given to the Commission’s proposal to use the flexibility instrument for this purpose.
Finally, a couple of words about the growth rate for the global appropriations for payments. In this connection, I am pleased that Parliament agrees about the need to exercise budget discipline and sound financial management. During the consultation in July, Parliament declared that the growth rate for the global appropriations for payments should be kept as low as possible. At the same time, account must be taken of the Council’s first reading of the 2003 budget. As politicians, all of us in this Assembly are well aware that significant refunds to the Member States of unused EU funds present the public with a poor picture of the EU. We must show the surrounding world that we are in a position to engage in realistic budgeting.
The Council would like to request the Commission to state the anticipated surplus for 2002 so that this can be factored into the 2003 budget via a letter of amendment.
Allow me to go on to mention a number of key features of the Council’s draft budget.
The global appropriations for commitments amount to EUR 99 548 million, which constitutes an increase of scarcely 0.9% on the 2002 figure. Special account has been taken of the possibility of the appropriations in actual fact having been used up.
The global appropriations for payments amount to EUR 96 992 million, which constitutes an increase of 1.4% on the 2002 figure. This low growth rate must be seen in the light of the limited use of appropriations for payments in preceding years.
The first reading of the 2003 draft budget took place:
with due account being taken of the interinstitutional agreement of 6 May 1999 on budgetary discipline and improvement of the budgetary procedure
within the framework of the Council’s conclusions of 5 March 2002 concerning the budgetary guidelines for 2003, and
During the preparatory three-way discussion and consultation meeting in July, some single-minded work was done by the Danish Finance Minister, Thor Pedersen, Committee Chairman Terry Wynn and your fellow MEPs in the committee. I am certain that this work has created a sound basis for the budget authority’s two branches being able to reach agreement on a satisfactory budget for 2003.
with account being taken of the conclusions from the consultation meeting of 19 July 2002 between Parliament and the Council.
Particular care was taken
to maintain the annual expenditure ceilings established in the financial perspectives for 2000-2006
if possible, to leave adequate margins below the ceilings for the various areas of expenditure, except in the case of the categories relating to Structural Funds and pre-accession aid, in which the ceilings include expenditure targets
to set adequate funds aside for the EU’s various priorities.
I should like to emphasise a couple of the main points in the Council draft budget within the various areas of expenditure.
With regard to agriculture, the Council proposes an adjustment downwards of EUR 288 million. Experience has shown that the appropriations for the common agricultural policy have often been set too high. The Commission is now being given the opportunity to re-evaluate its estimate in connection with the autumn letter of amendment. Due account can be taken in this context of the latest information concerning, for example, market conditions and the changing rate of exchange of the dollar. In this connection, the Council joins with Parliament in noting that the Commission will also look more closely into whether the amount it has proposed for eradicating animal diseases is adequate. When it comes to the appropriations for the development of rural districts, the Council has accepted the Commission’s preliminary draft budget.
Where structural arrangements are concerned, the appropriations for commitments have been fully charged to the budget. This has happened in accordance with the conclusions from the European Council meeting in March 1999 in Berlin. The Council has accepted the Commission’s proposals almost in their entirety. There has nonetheless been a downwards adjustment of EUR 525 million in the appropriations to the Structural Funds in the light of previous years’ underutilisation of the appropriations.
Where the internal policies are concerned, the Council has accepted the amounts about which agreement was reached in connection with already adopted multiannual programmes. In the case of programmes under discussion, the Council has adjusted the appropriations so that they reflect the Council’s common position or the result of the discussions in the Council. These downward adjustments do not affect projects in connection with regions bordering on the candidate countries. Allow me also just to mention that the Council has slightly increased the appropriations for funding the special Olympic Games in Europe in 2003.
A margin of EUR 122 million has been left under the ceiling for expenditure area 3, enabling the European Parliament to fund various priorities, at the same time as making it possible to cover future needs.
I know that some MEPs have previously been disappointed about the fact that the European Parliament and the Council have had difficulty reaching agreement, but that has not been the case this year, which is something I am very pleased about.
Where expenditure area 4 – external policies – is concerned, the Council has accepted the appropriations in the Commission’s draft budget almost in their entirety. It is important, for example, to finance the efforts in Afghanistan. Under expenditure area 4, the Council has agreed to accept the appropriations to international fisheries agreements proposed by the Commission. I have already mentioned the Council decision concerning the budget for the CFSP.
A margin of EUR 80 million under the ceiling for expenditure area 4 has been left, enabling the European Parliament to fund various priorities, at the same time as making it possible also to cover future needs.
I have already mentioned the administrative expenditure under category 5.
I shall conclude my report on the various expenditure areas with expenditure area 7, relating to pre-accession aid. The Council draft budget makes no changes to the Commission’s proposals concerning the appropriations for commitments. The appropriations for payments have, however, been adjusted downwards by EUR 300 million. This must be seen in the light of the preceding years’ underutilisation of the appropriations.
All in all, I am pleased to be able to state that the Council draft budget for 2003 contains sufficient funds to cover the EU’s various priorities, as well as taking account of the agreements and common understandings we reached at the first consultation meeting in July.
You all know that this budget procedure is only just beginning and that there is still a way to go before the final adoption of the 2003 budget. The prior conditions are present for our being able to obtain a satisfactory budget by the end of the year. The draft budget prepared by the Council offers a sound basis for this. The agreements and common understandings we reached at the meeting on 19 July are a positive sign that we have the will to reach agreement.
In conclusion, I would point out that I am certain that all three institutions present here today will do their best to contribute to a careful prioritisation so that the challenges of next year can be met. I am also certain that we shall not forget that, in the last analysis, the EU budget is funded by the citizens of Europe. That is why budgeting must be realistic and responsible – for next year too.
I shall presently touch upon a number of challenges which have already been debated by the European Parliament and the Council and in connection with which agreements and common understandings have been reached. I shall then provide a general survey of the main features of the draft budget prepared by the Council on 22 July.
I should first like, however, to refer to the debate we have just had in connection with the tragic floods. We are all agreed that this new challenge requires prompt action to be taken. It is heartening that the individual Member States have already, on their own initiative, been contributing to the reconstruction. At the same time, the Commission has implemented a series of initiatives, which have just been discussed, and the Council is now to debate what further measures can be implemented.
I shall now return to the results of the meeting of Parliament and the Council on 19 July.
A common understanding and agreement were reached to the effect that the administrative preparation for enlargement is a key priority which the institutions must be given the opportunity to discuss from now on and right through 2003.
A common understanding was reached to the effect that work must be done on securing funding for the common foreign and security policy in the light of important new tasks."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples