Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-12-04-Speech-4-015"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20031204.1.4-015"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, it is with a certain satisfaction that I hear the Court of Auditors praising the Commission’s efforts at reform. At the same time, it is a good thing that, for the first time, the Court of Auditors has not discovered material errors in connection with implementing the pre-accession aid for the candidate countries. Finally, it is also worth noting that the Court of Auditors has approved the 2002 accounts for the European Development Fund, even if there are critical remarks concerning their inspection. I wish to emphasise that we in the Group of the European Liberal, Democrat and Reform Party fully support the Court of Auditors’ proposal that the European Development Fund be integrated into the general budget.
At the same time, it is extremely worrying that the Court of Auditors cannot again approve the really big budget items such as the expenditure on agricultural aid, structural funds and internal policies, that is to say items constituting approximately 80% of the EU budget. In this area, we must be aware of the fact that administration and control of these budget items is, to a large degree, taken care of by the Member States themselves. There are also these budget items that, year after year, completely miss the mark in budgeting terms. This year, total under-use amounted to EUR 7.4 billion, or EUR 7 400 million, and that is extremely unsatisfactory. That is money that should and could have been used to fulfil the political objectives, and, had it not been used for those purposes, it could have been used in other of the EU’s budget areas, for example research and development.
I think these problems should lead to reflection upon the structures for exercising control in the area of the budget, with competence shared between the Commission and the Member States. In the first instance, I think that efforts should be made to coordinate and upgrade the Member States’ control of EU funds. A working party could be set up, consisting of representatives from the Member States’ respective control bodies. Of course, the Court of Auditors must have a seat on the working party, and the objective must be to develop a uniform control standard on the ‘best practice’ model. In the longer term, it should be considered whether the incentive for the efficient control of EU funds is simply too weak in the Member States. If that proves to be the case, top priority should be given to setting up a common European prosecution service.
In conclusion, I have a practical question for Mr Fabra Vallés. In connection with the publication of the report, and also in this House today, you have said that the Commission’s deadline for reforming the accounting system, namely January 2005, is very optimistic. I should like to ask what considerations form the basis of this statement, for I have noticed that the Court of Auditors has not evaluated the accounting reforms in the report."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples