Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-05-17-Speech-3-347"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20060517.23.3-347"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
".
Mr President, normally it is ‘ladies first’, but I am delighted to start the process, otherwise we are going to go round in circles.
We believe that Parliament must take the initiative to begin preparations for the mid-term review of the next multiannual financial framework planned for 2008. This will allow us to drive forward the comprehensive reassessment of the EU’s revenue and expenditure and shake up the system in order to create momentum for adapting our political priorities.
In conclusion, the 2007 budget procedure, as the first budget of the new financial perspective, represents a real opportunity for a broad mobilisation to adjust to the new policy challenges of a fast-changing world. This fits in, Madam Commissioner, with the Commission’s focus on policy by results, but a broader global vision is needed. Let us be open to new ideas and provide a strong focus on policy priorities, while improving the EU’s accountability.
Finally, I will warmly welcome contributions from the outset from all parliamentary committees to establish the sectoral priorities for this budget. I believe we have a great opportunity to shape our future policies together and respond effectively to the demands of European citizens.
With today’s decision on the shape of the new financial perspective now behind us, we must now look ahead and formulate the broad strategy for implementation in the coming years, whatever its imperfections in terms of balance or level of expenditure allocated. From the outset it is noticeable that the annual policy strategy treats the budget year of 2007 as one of a continuing series in the life of the Commission to implement the well-established priorities of prosperity, solidarity, security and Europe as a global partner. We take a different view. We do not believe that it is business as usual. On the contrary, we see the 2007 budget as being a real opportunity to set a new strategic tone to the way in which the European Union delivers its policy agenda.
When reading the document, there is a strong sense of complacency, Madam Commissioner, a real lack of urgency about how to tackle the global economic political challenges facing the European Union. Not least, there is no specific mention of the rapid rise of China and India in the global economy. This will undoubtedly affect substantially both internal as well as external policies in the year ahead. If, after all, strategies formulated at regional and local level, such as in the Thames Valley, include this factor as an urgent priority, why does the Commission choose to leave it out?
In sum, it reads rather like a routine bureaucratic document without serious political leadership or guidance. Running through the report are three interlinked strands.
The first is the combined impact of reduced resources under the new financial perspective, and the emergence of new challenges leaves us no option but to set clear priorities in the next budget. These priorities must be focused to reflect the new challenges lying ahead. This is more a process during the life of the financial perspectives than simply in the 2007 budget. In setting policy priorities for external relations, the 2007 budget must lay the groundwork for an increasingly outward-looking European Union. Our citizens’ security and prosperity will depend on how effectively the Union can respond to global challenges in a world very different from that only a decade ago. We should aim in fact to lead, rather than harness, the globalisation process. In these circumstances it is essential for the Union to develop a coherent, over-arching strategy which will better define its strategic priorities in the 21st century for the world outside, and that must begin with this budget.
Secondly, interlinked with the first priority, is that of ensuring security for European citizens in areas such as freedom and security and justice, as well as the specific sector of energy supply that we have just been discussing.
No less important for us is the third priority, dealing with internal policies. Here we must focus on those areas that are key to Europe’s competitiveness and our future prosperity. These include research and innovation, innovative measures for SMEs, support for lifelong learning for renewing skills and key infrastructure projects.
In the light of limitations on the Union’s financial resources, we must examine more closely the quality of European Union expenditure. The beginning of a new financial perspective offers a significant opportunity for starting a rolling programme for assessing the performance of EU activities. Through cost-benefit analyses we will take steps to assess whether specific actions achieve their objectives, what their impact was compared to the quantity of expenditure allocated, and what European added value they contributed.
We are convinced that such a focus on quality is essential in order to compensate for a lack of quantity in budgetary means. This would mean deleting programmes if they no longer produce value for money and creating programmes that are more relevant to a changing global environment. It should also mean avoiding the use of public funds, for example in information policy, where EU-financed actions could replace viable, ongoing private initiatives."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples