Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2008-04-22-Speech-2-031"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20080422.4.2-031"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
". −
Mr President, Commissioner, the Committee on the Environment was pleased with the work done by the Directorate-General for the Environment and the Directorate-General for Health. I know that is something you do not hear from me very often. Usually I criticise the Commission, but in this case ‘if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it’. Those responsible for budgets in both Directorates-General are very cooperative. Thank you very much.
I would also like to thank the rapporteur, Dan Jørgensen. He worked hard throughout the entire budget discharge procedure, has presented an excellent report and generously took on board all the conclusions of the Committee on the Environment on granting discharge for 2006. The Committee on Budgetary Control has thereby acknowledged what the Committee on the Environment adopted unanimously. Thank you very much for that, too.
May I now to say a few words about our agencies. We in the Committee on the Environment were also pleased with the work and budget management of the four agencies: the European Environment Agency, the European Food Safety Authority, the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control and the European Medicines Agency.
When we advised the Committee on Budgetary Control to grant discharge for the 2006 financial year, it was not done lightly. Quite to the contrary! There was frequent exchange of information with members of the management board and with the directors in the committee.
In addition, several delegations from our committee visited the agencies to satisfy themselves as to the activities on the ground. Therefore it was all the more incomprehensible to us all when the rapporteur in the Committee on Budgetary Control did not want to grant discharge for three of the four agencies, for the most incredible reasons – particularly as, even if they were valid, the agencies themselves were not responsible for those points, for example staff regulations relating to temporary staff of the institution, or the location of the head office of the relevant agency, or even the way the principle of subsidiarity was observed. Phrases like: ‘There has been irresponsible proliferation,’ ‘new agencies have been set up on the basis of bizarre political decisions, these new agencies are not subject to control and are often uncontrollable, mostly inefficient and, above all, they give rise to significant burdens on European taxpayers,’ and ‘at the same time, an unprecedented range of staff privileges has become established’ – have nothing but shock value. We are all well aware that there is a deliberate scheme afoot to whip up a scandal about work at European level. I utterly abhor this scandal-mongering.
Agencies are European administrative units, although they have a unique nature. They do not just drop out of the sky; they do not just occur spontaneously to the Commission alone; they are established by a proper regulatory procedure, either by codecision or in consultation or, depending on the policy field, by regulation, i.e. by legislation. This means that these agencies are brought into being by the European legislator, which means that we are the ‘adventurers’ being referred to. The budget for the agencies is part of the budget of the European Union itself. Each financial year, we discharge the director. I believe there is no section of the administration that is controlled as well as the agencies and I am therefore delighted and thankful that the committee has put a stop to this attempt to create a scandal."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples