Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2004-03-31-Speech-3-279"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20040331.13.3-279"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, Commissioner, this is not the first time that this Parliament has called for integration of the European Development Fund in the EU budget. This is an item that has been put on the agenda with clockwork regularity over the past 25 years. But given the point at which we now find ourselves, Europe must not and cannot let this go. It will not be up to us here in Parliament. If the Council adopts the advice of Parliament, the European Union will be another step closer to a really democratic and transparent policy.
It is out of date for the EDF not to fall within the power of the Budgetary Authority. It is also out of date for Parliament not to have any say in the level of the funding, the programming or the allocations for each country, region or sector. We are after all talking about half of the total EU development aid budget! Currently the EDF escapes our parliamentary control almost entirely and this lack of control is by no means redressed by the only power that the Parliament does have in respect of the EDF, that of granting discharge.
Apart from this democratic deficit, there is a second drawback to keeping the EDF outside the budget, which is the duplications that occur in the annual budgets of the Union and the EDF. The funding of food aid, humanitarian aid and thematic operations in ACP (African, Caribbean and Pacific) countries often comes out of the Community budget. This duplication means that one monetary flow of aid passes from the same donor to the same beneficiary under two different procedures. That really should convince the Council. It is also inconsistent with the reforms that began some years ago in the external relations sector of the Commission.
Budgetisation of the EDF requires a change in the administrative procedures and a change of mentality. I expressly seek the guarantee from the European Commission and the Commissioner that this will be carried out with care and that the Cotonou Agreement will remain the framework for the budgetised EDF, so that we do not lose the benefits of the present system, such as reciprocal involvement of the ACP countries and Europe and the multi-annual programming of the budget. However, in view of the benefits of integration of the EDF in the budget, this must not be an impediment to seizing this opportunity.
As regards content, integration of the EDF in the Community budget means that as a Parliament we can really work on achieving the millennium goals. I repeat, half of our entire budget is in the EDF. It must be stipulated in the budgets of the ACP countries that a minimum of 35% of the funds are to go to social welfare, 20% of which to education and healthcare. We must ensure, though, that specific allocations for countries and regions remain the basis and that movement of investments only takes place in consultation with the ACP countries.
Finally, I would point out that on integration of the EDF in the budget the coherence principle must be strictly maintained, so that aid and hands are put to work combating poverty. Mr President, Commissioner, this Commission proposal is eminently suitable for making the overall effort of Europe for the poorest countries, the ACP countries, very much more effective, more serious and more democratically controlled. I hope that you, with our support, will be successful in the Council. I would expect all countries to see the benefits that I have enumerated here."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples