Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2007-10-23-Speech-2-227"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20071023.23.2-227"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, I am going to focus my comments on the report by our colleague, Mr Itälä, who has done a good job. We know it is always very difficult to decide the budget for our institution.
I have only one real regret: there is something very special about the 2008 budget. It is the last budget in which we could collect a lot of money together for investment, particularly in Parliament’s property policy. We have 32 places of work, if you count all our offices in different capitals. Apart from Brussels and Strasbourg, we own only six of the places in which we work in the various countries. We know there is an acquisition policy, which the Court of Auditors is regularly asking us to pursue but we cannot implement it because Mr Itälä – and I understand his concern about sending out a signal by saying we are not spending all the money because we want to remain below the 20% ceiling – is preventing Parliament from injecting money into it and putting together a property portfolio. However, it was 2008 or never, because in 2009 we will be paying for the Member’s Statute, as you know, and we will no longer be able to do it.
Apart from that climb-down, I have to acknowledge that Mr Itälä has done a very good job, and in particular it is one of the greenest budgets I have seen as it contains many provisions, particularly provisions to reduce carbon emissions, offset our carbon impact, a desire to have a fleet of vehicles that includes hybrid cars, the desire to cut the number of meetings by holding videoconferences, and even by reducing the amount of travel by officials, who do not necessarily follow us to the places where they are needed.
To sum up, therefore, we should have had more money for investment and actions in 2008, the pre-election year, but generally speaking it is still a very good report because of the impact on policies I hold dear. That is why we will vote for this report, Mr President."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples