Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-09-04-Speech-3-252"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20020904.7.3-252"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, Commissioner, and those ladies and gentlemen who are still present, the report on the 2001 annual report on the European Agency for Reconstruction was adopted unanimously by the Committee on Foreign Affairs, Human Rights, Common Security and Defence Policy on 11 June 2002. The vote in plenary was, however, deliberately adjourned to the autumn, in order to give the Commission the opportunity to comply with a demand constantly reiterated by the Foreign Policy Committee by presenting a strategy for overall policy in the Balkans and the Agency for Reconstruction's role in it and clarifying how, in future, functions are to be shared out between, on the one hand, the Agency and, on the other, the delegations on the ground.
The Commission has not submitted a report on this, nor has it kept to the November 2001 agreement in which it undertook to present the report on the medium-term strategy for the administration of EU aid in the context of the stabilisation and association process before the end of March 2002. The European Commission's report on strategies for assistance in the Western Balkans is a very thorough depiction of the situation, and Commissioner Patten was also available on 19 June to give us additional information. No strategy in this sense was articulated, however, something that Mr Swoboda summed up with words to the effect that, if there were no such strategy, that itself spoke volumes.
The demand that the Commission submit a report to the Council, not as late as June 2004, just before the European Agency for Reconstruction's mandate expires, but by June 2003 at the latest, and involve Parliament in this, is therefore all the more important. Only thus can we avoid destabilising the Agency and ensure that it can work efficiently. This becomes a matter of even more pressing concern in view of the EU's financial commitments in the Balkans. I was myself able, when visiting Pristina, to satisfy myself as to the Agency's efficiency, which, incidentally, the Court of Auditors has also confirmed.
It is extremely regrettable and gives cause for concern that the export of electricity by the local electricity company KEK resulted in substantial irregularities, with export earnings amounting to USD 4.2 million landing up in an illicit account in Gibraltar. The Agency has itself, however, introduced measures to prevent future criminal manoeuvres of this kind within KEK and help it to clear them up.
The Agency for Reconstruction also itself called in OLAF in relation to the contract of a questionable external advisor. What is important in this connection is that an internal auditor is to be appointed as soon as possible.
The provision of electricity in Kosovo still leaves much to be desired. That a new agreement between UNMIK and Serbia created the political conditions for making it easier to supply Kosovo with adequate electricity is something to be welcomed. As rapporteur, I am aware that the Agency works in Kosovo under difficult political conditions. Its political status has still not been clarified, and there are continuing ethnic tensions between the Serb minority and the Albanian majority. Making the positive influence of the European Union and of the Agency visible is thus all the more important. Any strategy for this region must have as its objective the facilitation of a sustainable policy and the progressive reduction of financial grants from the EU, principally through efficient charging for all public services.
The extension of the Agency's mandate to Macedonia aroused controversy, as the political situation prevailing in Macedonia at the outset, whilst extremely fragile, was quite different to that in Kosovo and, above all, because the consultation mechanism between the Commission and Parliament, by which of course funds have to be approved, was not always ideal. The report therefore proposes political guidelines for the Agency, and future work can centre around these. The decision-making mechanisms in the Commission's individual offices should also be as clear and transparent as possible.
Turning specifically to the Agency's commitments in Macedonia, the situation has improved, and it has been possible to complete 900 houses. Progress has also been made in clearing mines. It is also particularly important that the Agency should enjoy a problem-free working relationship with the local delegation in Macedonia, where elections are due to be held on 15 September. The situation there is extremely tense, and it is not certain whether these elections will be held under proper conditions, if, that is, they are held at all.
Today in plenary, we have been debating the European Union's responsibility for Afghanistan, and have assured Commissioner Patten of our support. What is true of Afghanistan applies far more to the Balkans, for which the European Union has a direct responsibility. In this sense, the report on the Agency for Reconstruction should make a contribution to sustainable crisis management."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples