Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2004-12-14-Speech-2-158"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20041214.12.2-158"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, administrative expenditure has not of course been the most difficult aspect of this year’s budget negotiations, especially since employees’ salary increases were clearly to remain below 1% this year instead of 2.6%, as originally foreseen. With the figures from Parliament’s first reading, there is thus a suitable margin below the ceiling for administrative expenditure. To this, we can add that certain institutions have been able to expedite their payments this year and have thus brought about the possibility of savings on the 2005 budget. All in all, it has therefore been successfully ensured that the other institutions – that is to say, apart from Parliament and the Council, the Court of Justice, the Court of Auditors, the European Economic and Social Committee, the Committee of the Regions, the European Ombudsman and the European Data Protection Supervisor – are able to make the planned staff appointments resulting from enlargement, staffing reforms and the reform of financial administration.
In practice, the savings due to the lower salary increases will now be implemented with the help of an amending budget in the course of 2005. It was that agreement into which we entered with the Council. We are not therefore voting on these savings at Parliament’s second reading but, by making savings by means of a second amending budget, we are also making savings on the Council’s and Parliament’s budgets, which have of course been drawn up in the light of the conciliation entered into with the Council at first reading.
So far, so good. It is important for all the institutions continually to ensure that the administration is as efficient and inexpensive as possible. It is especially important, moreover, that we obtain financial gains through cooperation between the institutions. That is also why I think it important that, early next year – and before 1 April – we obtain an updated report from the secretaries-general on how the appointments are going. We have seen the delays there have been in recruiting staff following enlargement, and I think it important that we closely follow up how these matters are proceeding so that we might see if there are likely to be problems.
In other areas, too, there is a real need for the institutions to cooperate in their deliberations. I should like at this point to restrict the focus somewhat and also issue a challenge to Parliament’s leadership. One practical example is the Committee of the Regions’ desire to be able to use Parliament’s meeting rooms in Brussels for its meetings. It makes good sense for us to make facilities available as long as, by doing so, we are not interfering with Parliament’s working arrangements. That is a decision that Parliament’s leadership must make. It must be a decision that fits in with our work, but also one that is remunerative.
Parliament’s budget stands at 20% of administrative expenditure and appears reasonable in relation to needs. I would, however, emphasise – as I have done in the past – that in recent years we have been able to deploy major expenditure on paying for buildings under this 20% budget, and we shall thus save on rent in the budgets for the next few years. This will also happen in the current year when more than EUR 130 million will be paid out on the two new buildings – D4 and D5 – in Brussels.
When all is said and done, there will be some room for manoeuvre in Parliament’s budget for 2005, and I would therefore call upon Parliament’s leaders to look at the quality of the assistance we are given as MEPs, for example regarding translation and legal assistance. We often have to make compromises, including ones that are perhaps not always satisfactory, for example on the linguistic front. With enlargement and increasing legislative activity, we need access to advice, as well as to studies, consultations and analyses. It is now Parliament that is people’s window onto joint legislation, and we must therefore demand conditions that ensure we can do legislative work of the proper quality. The 2005 budget appropriates EUR 17.5 million to an increase in MEPs’ remuneration for the purpose of appointing staff. MEPs are experiencing an increasing burden of work as a result not only of the increasing legislative work but also of enlargement. The legislation on which we work is very often technically complicated environmental and commercial legislation, and we therefore require support in our work. That is why it is also only fair that MEPs be given higher remuneration so that we can appoint staff and, equally to the point, do so under reasonable working conditions. The amount concerned has been placed in reserve while we awaited a decision. The decision has now been made; clear rules in a number of areas have been adopted; and the Committee on Budgets will thus be able next year to adopt a position on removing the reserve in the light of a request by Parliament’s President.
Finally, I should like to say thank you for your constructive cooperation on this budget procedure. I would particularly thank Mrs Grybauskaite, our Commissioner, who was very active in bringing about a compromise on the budget. I would also thank the Council’s negotiator, Mr Nicolaï, and the rapporteur, Mr Garriga Polledo, who I think have made fantastic contributions to the budget procedure. Last but not least, I would thank my colleagues, the coordinators, for their constructive cooperation on the budget."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples