Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-02-12-Speech-3-263"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20030212.9.3-263"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, as draftsperson of the opinion of the Committee on Budgets for this report, I must say that we issued our opinion last June with necessary speed for the multi-annual programme, which covers 2003-2006, to be fulfilled within the scheduled time period, but it was no use because, in view of the dates we are dealing with, it has clearly not been fulfilled.
Without getting into an assessment of the main report which, naturally, is the responsibility of the Committee on Development, from a budgetary point of view I would like to say that the new financial framework proposed by the Commission meant an increase of 78% in the new programme in comparison with the previous one, which ended on 31 December 2002, which reflects the importance the Community attaches to this programme with a view to improving the reproductive health of people without sufficient economic resources in the developing countries.
The financial framework we voted on in the Committee on Budgets was the one that appeared in the Commission’s preliminary draft budget and which was finally ratified in the 2003 budget. It will not be possible to increase the amount proposed without reducing other policies in the same heading, because the financial ceiling has already been reached.
The new Rules of Procedure have already entered into force and we therefore have Rule 63, which says: 'When the committee responsible amends the financial endowment of the act it is considering, it shall request the opinion of the committee responsible for budgetary issues'. This is not trivial.
The Committee on Development, for its part, has increased the amount without requesting the opinion of the Committee on Budgets. In turn, at the meeting of coordinators of the Committee on Budgets it was agreed to present an amendment on behalf of that committee to the legislative proposal in order to clarify this issue and re-establish the initial amendment presented in my report.
I am aware of the efforts made in the Committee competent for the main report to reach a consensus which would allow it to be approved at first reading and I congratulate them on their work. I am also aware of the thankless role the Committee on Budgets has to play on this issue, since it makes it the final judge of sensitive programmes whose verdict is based strictly on the budgetary framework. And I have already said that I am not going to get into assessing the fundamental aspects of the report.
I believe we must be coherent with what we approve on this new regulation and we must use it, because that is what differentiates us from a secondary school assembly.
Therefore, ladies and gentlemen, for the sake of responsible and coherent parliamentary conduct, I would urge you to vote in favour of the amendments presented on behalf of the Committee on Budgets."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples