Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-11-20-Speech-4-012"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20031120.1.4-012"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, Commissioner, today we are going to vote on three more reports from the package of seven. They are all aimed at providing a legal basis for the various subsidies in the former lines known as A-30, and on Monday 24 November we will hold a conciliation meeting with the Council, in which we will try to reach a consensus which allows us to approve all of these proposals before the end of this year, so that they may be executed in 2004. In fact, the most serious problem we are facing now is ensuring that the appropriations intended for these subsidies can be executed during next year.
In any event, with all the problems we still have to resolve on Monday 24, I hope, Mr President, that Parliament and the Council can negotiate all of this successfully.
I would therefore address the European Commission, which, in its communication to the Council and European Parliament, when commenting on the proposals, spoke of transitional measures in the event that the basic instruments are not approved before the end of this year.
It appears that the transitional measure in question consists of extending the time limit for approval until the end of January 2004, which in truth does not solve the problem, because both Commissioner Schreyer and Commissioner Reding have said very explicitly that, if the legal bases have not been approved before the end of January, the appropriations will not be able to be executed.
I would therefore like to remind the Commission of its own words and I quote: ‘In the event that this objective is not achieved, the Commission will propose, in due time, exceptional transitional measures which will allow subsidies to be allocated in 2004 while awaiting the adoption of the basic instruments’.
It is clear that extending the time limit until the end of January 2004 is not a transitional measure, since it does not allow execution if these basic instruments have not been approved. Parliament has made an effort to work very quickly in order to make it in time, but we do not know what is going to happen in the conciliation procedure and, if it fails, the commission is obliged to stand by its word and seek a solution – and I would repeat its own words – in order to ‘allocate subsidies in 2004 while awaiting the adoption of the basic instruments’.
With regard to the conciliation of 24 November, the fundamental issues to be negotiated are going to be, firstly, the financial contribution for each programme, their duration and the application of degressivity – which has already been mentioned – but, above all, it is the issue of the application of the pre-allocation in what we call ear-marking which will undoubtedly be the main stumbling block, Commissioner. I will therefore expand further on this point.
The pre-allocation relates to the proposal on culture and citizenship, and Parliament wishes to maintain its right to this prerogative, and this is something it is going to defend before the Council. I would like to say once again that I have never been in favour of pre-allocation, but, like Mrs Rühle, I must recognise that, recently and above all thanks to the Commission's attitude, I am beginning to change my opinion, because, when I see the Commission's unwillingness to find a solution for the executability of the subsidies in 2004, when I see the Commission's attitude to the executability of pilot projects and preparatory actions adopted by Parliament at first reading, I begin to ask myself many questions, Commissioner, and if the Commission simply places obstacles in the way of all of this Parliament's initiatives in the budget, it has no choice but to fight harder to defend its prerogatives. And the Commission should not tell me that its proposals already provide for pre-allocation; the Commission is completely convinced and knows that, in any event, we were going to have the stumbling block with the Council.
Mr Kinnock, I am very sorry that the Commission is taking no notice of my appeals, but I have been surprised and irritated to see that the Commission published in the Official Journal of the European Union of 18 November, that is to say, the day before yesterday, the invitation for proposals for 2004 for organisations which promote mutual understanding in relations between the European Union and certain non-industrialised regions of the world, in other words the Sacrédeus report, which we are going to vote on today from 12 noon.
It seems to be very serious that the Commission has allowed this invitation to be published before Parliament has approved its position and, naturally, before the Council has adopted its decision. In other words, there is currently no legal basis for this invitation. It may be the case that by doing so the Commission wanted to speed up the procedures in order to facilitate the execution for 2004 but I sincerely believe that it has exceeded its powers."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples