Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2004-12-15-Speech-3-010"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20041215.2.3-010"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:translated text |
"The discussions at the summit will also take stock of the situation regarding the Financial Perspectives for 2007-2013.
I still believe that the Commission’s proposals are sound, based as they are on a broad political consensus on what the EU must do. The truth is that the political project on which the Commission’s proposals are based was not actually at risk. The Commission’s proposals therefore constitute a valid working basis. The current ceiling for own resources remains in place despite new requests to the EU due to the enlargement and to the development of new policies. They are therefore reasonable proposals.
What we want to offer, however, is actual added European value, on top of what is offered at national level. Of course, we must ensure discipline in the budgetary process, but this cannot be achieved by setting arbitrary limits, without reference to what the budget aims to achieve. I am aware that some Member States remain convinced that the EU budget should be limited to 1% of gross national revenue. I do not believe that the EU’s policy objectives are compatible with such a figure.
Are we prepared to abandon the challenges of social and economic cohesion, which are all the more pressing after enlargement? Are we really being serious as regards the policy of investing in the major trans-European transport networks? Are we really being serious as regards the need to foster the European research policy? How can we ensure a European contribution towards combating terrorism and towards safeguarding our citizens’ security? Let me state this to you clearly: we cannot have more Europe with less money and a union ceases to be a union if the objective of cohesion is forgotten.
A 1% limit would force us to cut back on our political objectives and would force us to re-assess commitments already made. The Commission’s position is therefore clear: our starting point is the package submitted in February of last year.
In spite of the Dutch Presidency’s very hard work, the negotiations have, thus far, yet to really begin. I sincerely hope that the Luxembourg Presidency will be able to drive this process forward and ensure that effective negotiations go ahead, because it is important that we respect the timetable established in the Council’s multiannual strategic programme. We must ensure that the programmes are fully up and running by 1 January 2007. This means that we must reach a political agreement in June of next year.
There is one thing I can promise: as always, the Commission will not be the stumbling block to the outcome of negotiations. We shall help the Member States to reach agreements, but not at any price."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples