Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2004-12-14-Speech-2-197"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20041214.13.2-197"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, Commissioner, the Prodi Commission left us with two communications: one on the general framework for the 2007-2015 budget and another on the legal bases for the policies which must be funded.
Commissioner, Mr President, by creating a Temporary Committee on Policy Challenges and Budgetary Means and appointing its own President as
chairman of that committee, which is not normal, this Parliament wished to give a clear demonstration of its interest and political commitment to a process which is so sensitive and essential to the future of Europe.
We know that we are facing some very important challenges. How to fund the enlargement we have just carried out. How to confront the enlargements which are on the horizon and which will undoubtedly take place within the framework of the future financial perspectives. How to ensure that Europe’s increasing role in the world is backed up with sufficient economic resources. How to realise the policies which will make Europe what we always call, when speaking of Lisbon, the most dynamic and competitive economy in the world.
All of this must be included in the budget, because what is not in the budget does not exist, as Finance Ministers say. The expression may be somewhat of an exaggeration, but we know that, in order for certain things to exist, they must first appear in the budgets.
Commissioner, Mr President, the Barroso Commission has been confirmed by means of a very broad vote of confidence from this House. This is the time for you to demonstrate that you are not simply mediators between Parliament and the Council, but that you are able to show strong political leadership. The financial perspectives offer a great opportunity to demonstrate this.
The Council of Ministers has already begun working on an
committee, as its representative, Mr Nicolaï, has told us, and we in the European Parliament have created a temporary committee, which it is my honour to chair, which has already produced a series of documents and within which our rapporteur, Mr Böge, is doing very considerable work on making Parliament's position coherent.
We are all, therefore, aware of the importance of this task, which must serve to establish the political priorities and define the budgetary resources available to the Union during 2007-2013.
Everybody knows – though I must remind you of it – that without the agreement of Parliament there will be no financial perspectives. Without the agreement of Parliament it will not be possible to reach an interinstitutional agreement which does not appear in the Treaty.
Parliament wishes to reach an agreement within the time limit laid down in the timetable, but it wants a good agreement, and in order to achieve one, certain issues must be clarified straightaway. Firstly, we need to know whether the current Commission officially accepts the proposals of the outgoing Commission.
It is true that you, Commissioner, have already told us in the meeting of the Temporary Committee on Policy Challenges and Budgetary Means, that the Commission headed by Mr Barroso directly accepts the proposals of the outgoing Commission. Shortly afterwards, however, leaks and comments have appeared in the media suggesting that the Commission intends, or at least accepts, not going as far as the proposals produced by the Prodi Commission.
This is the time for you, Commissioner, here in Parliament, in the absence of the President of the Commission, formally to tell us, in your opinion, the level of resources Europe needs in order to fulfil its ambitions. It would also be good if you could explain to us which income structures you believe are most appropriate in order for the Union to be able to confront its current and future needs.
Secondly, it would also be a good thing for us to explore what would happen in the event that certain Member States prevent an agreement from being reached within the relevant time limit. Would the Commission then be prepared to provide for the transitional provisions necessary to ensure the continuity of multi-annual programmes in the absence of a framework agreement on the financial perspectives?
As you know, Parliament has already expressed its preference with regard to the duration of these financial perspectives. We believe that five years is preferable since it is more in line with the duration of the terms in office of Parliament and of the Commission."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
"ex oficio"1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples