Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-04-12-Speech-2-042"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20050412.6.2-042"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Mr President, I also wish to congratulate our rapporteurs, in particular Mr Wynn, on their reports on the budgetary discharges. I remember that the first one Mr Wynn produced in 1994, and my own in 1996, produced a different type of debate on discharges than the one we are having today.
Undoubtedly, as Mr Wynn has indicated to us, should the recommendations of his report be accepted and implemented then we would see a significant step towards getting the Statement of Assurance – DAS – which most of us in this House want. This would give greater credibility to management of funds by European institutions. This means greater responsibilities will have to be taken by all concerned, including responsibilities for the Chief Accounting Officer to sign off the accounts. The Commissioner has shown that he wants to go that way, but I strongly urge that Amendment 4 be adopted. We need Commissioners to take individual responsibility for ensuring directorates-general effectively manage the funds under their responsibilities. We also need to ensure that whistleblowers are properly protected should they wish to come forward with information about the operation of Community policies.
Above all, we need implementation with regard to the issue of shared management that Marta Andreasen mentioned. Shared management is no management unless there is a proper internal control framework to ensure that monies are properly accounted for in Member States. That is why we as Conservatives strongly support the move towards the greater involvement of Member States in the way in which things should be done.
In conclusion, we welcome very strongly the idea of having proposals by July, with a view to having an interinstitutional agreement by the end of this year. However, they are still just intentions and, therefore, Conservatives will be voting against discharge because, for the tenth year running, we note that there is no positive Statement of Assurance available."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples