Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-10-26-Speech-3-031"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2005-10-26"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Draft general budget for 2006 (Section III) - Draft general budget for 2006 (Other sections)2
dcterms:Language	"fi"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20051026.2.3-031"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2005-10-26-Speech-3-0322
lpv:speaker	lp:Esko Seppänen2
lpv:spokenAs	vice-chair; Delegation to the EU-Russia Parliamentary Cooperation Committee (2004-09-21--2009-07-13)3 unknown; Vasemmistoliitto (2004-07-20--2009-07-13)3 substitute; Delegation to the EU-Kazakhstan, EU-Kyrgyzstan and EU-Uzbekistan Parliamentary Cooperation Committees, and for relations with Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Mongolia (2004-09-15--2009-07-13)3 member_of_the_bureau; EUL/NGL (2004-07-20--2009-07-13)3 substitute; CONT (2004-07-21--2007-01-14)3 substitute; ITRE (2004-07-21--2007-01-14)3 member; BUDG (2004-07-21--2007-01-14)3
lpv:translated text	". Mr President, it could be claimed that the EU budgetary economy thrives in a world of plenty. For years the European Parliament’s own budget has been 10% air. This being the case, the Bureau of the European Parliament has had enormous difficulties spending the 20% share of the Union’s administrative expenditure that the other institutions give Parliament without questioning what the money is to be used for. Not all the uses for the money which our Bureau quickly dreams up are acceptable, however. In the drafting of the budget, a very stringent policy has been followed with regard to Section IV, whose ceiling for expenditure Parliament wishes to raise through maximum use of the flexibility instrument. The budget implementation figures proposed by the Commission for 2005 show that there is, and has been for a long time now, a lot of air in this Section; either that or the Commission is not implementing the wishes of Parliament with regard to the budget. The strangest aspect of the budget has to do with the budgeting of Structural Funds payments. The Council, in its own draft budget, has cut EUR 8 billion from the payment requirements put forward by the Member States. The same ministers who, on behalf of their countries, sent the Commission their country’s estimate of the amount of money needed to make payments for structural action have, in the Council, pruned back by a fifth the very requirements that they themselves put forward. Parliament has gone some way towards meeting the wishes of the Member States by taking 40% of the deficit for financing structural action into account in the budget, as advised by the Member States to the Commission. I would like to say on behalf of my group that next year’s budget will not meet the targets we have prioritised for developing the Union’s social dimension."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph