Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-12-17-Speech-2-148"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20021217.5.2-148"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, Mr President-in-Office of the Council, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, it is these speeches that remind us how close together we have been this year when dealing with specialised issues, as I believe that we are almost always discussing the same topics in this House, the very same ones that we are outlining now. I cannot, of course, stay out of this either, but I want to say something now, something to which the European public might perhaps be more determined to pay attention than it has been on repeated occasions over the past few years. Commissioner Schreyer referred to the rate of increase in the budget's commitments, which stands at 0.26%. Our budget does not show the rates of increase – let alone the rates of inflation – that were provided for in Berlin. We are well below them. In Berlin, the precaution was taken of creating a margin in order to make enlargement possible and easier. With a 0.26% increase, our present budgetary conduct brings us another step closer to that.
Take a look at payments, and the figure of 1.9% does not, at first sight, appear to be very much. It is substantially less than what would be needed to reduce the debts that are still outstanding. Despite that, 1.9% is more than what is currently available to many national Finance Ministers to draw up their own budgets. Nonetheless, we stick with this 1.9%, because it is important. We have to consider this budget, and what it covers, as a whole. We have a budget of less than EUR 100 billion! That is 25% less than what the fifteen States of the European Union spend on defence. What we get for 25% less – in other words, for EUR 100 billion – is cooperation across Europe on environmental matters, in the field of research and development, and on cohesion, so that we do not leave the more vulnerable in the lurch. Agriculture is wholly europeanised, and preparations are being made for youth exchange activities. We are preparing for enlargement, we have a common foreign and security policy, and we collaborate on justice and home affairs. I believe that it has to be said loud and clear that we spend substantially less on all of these things, so as to give Europe a viable and peaceful future, than is spent at national level in the area of defence policy alone.
Even though we have this tight budget and even though we have to take on new things with every passing year – as has already been said, there are new tasks in category IV almost every year – we nevertheless manage to set priorities that advance the economic development of the continent of Europe. Not only do we maintain and sustain a continent full of large corporations, but also the small and medium-sized enterprises on this European continent can make use of the opportunities offered by a shared internal market. They do not have their own departments to deal with tax or legal matters; what they need, in order to make the best use of this European internal market, with all its advantages, is help, and that is what we give.
We respond to the ageing of society in the European Union. Our own financial planning still needs to take this more into account. I have already made repeated reference to pensions, but we want in future to respond to the ageing of European society as a whole.
One very major priority has been and still is category IV. I read a newspaper report today, which stated that the European Parliament did not regard the fight against Aids as important. Let me point out now that Parliament has quadrupled the sum of money originally proposed to be allocated for this purpose. Anyone who claims that we do not attach enough importance to this has no idea what he is talking about.
I would like again to emphatically underline the great progress that this year's budget procedure has enabled us to make. I can follow on seamlessly from where Mr Ferber left off. There are parliamentary gaps that we need to close in this area, gaps that have to do with the monitoring of policies that are being moved from the national to the European level, and we are finding out where they are. We have managed to achieve a joint declaration with the Council, which makes considerable progress precisely in the area of security and defence policy, making it clear to the public that the European Parliament has no room for manoeuvre on European policies at European level. These are matters that will have to be resolved in the Convention, that really need to be organised elsewhere. Even so, we have already tackled them.
Mrs Schreyer, you have already acted as if all of this were already in the bag. We will of course scrutinise the Copenhagen conclusions, but what is in any case clear is that this is not just an issue to be resolved in Copenhagen by the Council, but one that we should be discussing among ourselves in this House. Although our attitude is very positive, your dogmatic ‘and so it was decided’ is something I cannot leave unchallenged. That can only be said when discussions have gone well and been concluded.
I wish to thank all of my fellow Members of this House, especially the two rapporteurs and the President, who has been patient enough to allow me an extra thirty seconds."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples