Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2004-12-14-Speech-2-199"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20041214.13.2-199"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
".
Mr President, I am supposed to say that officially I am responding on behalf of the Commission to four questions from Parliament, but I received a lot more. I will try to answer them as well as giving the 'official' response.
I would like to make two brief points in finalising the official answer to the question tabled. First, I wish to remind you of what President Barroso has said in this House: the European Union needs to match its political ambition with its financial resources. Increased spending has been proposed because, with enlargement and with a demand for action in new areas, it was inevitable. We cannot have a larger European Union with less money. Secondly, I underline the Commission's strong commitment to the need to respect the target of a political agreement by June 2005 and the adoption of legislative proposals by the end of that year.
The Irish and Netherlands presidencies have achieved considerable progress during their respective terms in the Council. We all need to sustain the momentum and actively support the efforts of the Luxembourg presidency to achieve political agreement by the end of its term. The Commission wishes the presidency well in the task of achieving the goals which will be useful for all European citizens.
I must say at the outset that in the Commission there are no internal discussions on ceilings other than the official proposal that was presented to you and to the Council. Despite media rumours, this is not a subject for discussion in the Commission.
Now the 'official' response to the first question: does the new Commission endorse the structure of the new financial perspective? Yes, the enlarged European Union faces new challenges and needs to meet new expectations. We need to update the structure of our financial perspectives to better reflect these new priorities. This entails a new classification of expenditure to give a new profile for the Union's finances. This more limited number of expenditure headings reflects the Union's main priorities, making them more visible to European citizens and rationalising expenditure accordingly. This Commission endorses the same priorities, i.e. transforming the European Union into a dynamic knowledge-based economy, pursuing greater cohesion in the context of the enlargement of the European Union, preserving and managing the European Union's natural resources – including agriculture, fisheries and the environment – and developing the area of freedom, security and justice and the role of the Union as a global partner.
The proposals before us reflect the needs of the Union, firstly because these priorities identify and represent a common consensus about where Europe must intensify its actions. Secondly, the proposed structure also offers a real step towards simplification and rationalisation, which was welcomed by Parliament in its resolution of 22 April. Finally, the proposals have already allowed both the Council and Parliament to have substantial discussions and prepare the ground for an agreement next year.
The second question: does the new Commission endorse the duration of the financial programmes which will commit the next Commission and the next European Parliament? Let me assure you that the Commission is fully aware of Parliament's position – which was also expressed in the resolution of 22 April – in which it calls for a financial framework to be established for a period of only five years. However, we looked into this question and concluded that for the next programming period, seven years would be the best solution because the ceiling for market-related expenditure and direct payments – in agriculture, for example – has already been fixed by the European Council until 2013. A seven-year timetable also maximises the benefits of long-term planning, in particular in cohesion policies.
The third question: does the new Commission endorse all the proposals in what is known as the 'Prodi package', or does it consider that it should be readjusted and, if so, on which issues? As I said earlier, we endorse all the proposals. The Commission stands by the package proposed earlier this year. We do not call it by that name: it is the Commission's proposal and we endorse that proposal, namely the proposed financial framework, complemented by a series of legislative and non-legislative proposals adopted between February and September 2004. They have been submitted to the Council and to various committees of this Parliament. The Commission foresees the adoption of the remaining necessary proposals early next year.
The political project which underpins the financial perspectives is based on a number of well-established priorities on which a consensus already exists between the European institutions on the number of commitments already made, for example on agriculture, enlargement, Lisbon, etc. Building on this, the Commission is now also preparing its five-year strategic objectives, which will be presented to Parliament by the end of January 2005. The Commission believes that the proposals constitute a good basis for an agreement for the next financial perspective. To reach such an agreement the Commission will be taking an active part in the discussions and negotiations that will take place with the European Parliament and the Council. In this context, the Commission will take fully into account the key points of the discussion and will strive to reach a political agreement by the end of June 2005.
The fourth question: is the Commission ready to take account of other institutions' priorities? The answer is yes. The Commission will of course take careful account of Parliament's position in relation to the initiatives already proposed and in view of those that will arrive in 2005. The package is already based on a very broad consensus about where actions are required, in the light of European Parliament resolutions, European Council conclusions and, indeed, discussions within the Commission.
The forthcoming discussions on the Commission's strategic objectives are directly linked to this, and the Commission attaches considerable importance to the establishment of common priorities. The Constitution will mean a codified multiannual financial framework, and I would like a common vision for the next programming period to be our first step on this path."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples