Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2009-11-24-Speech-2-357"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20091124.34.2-357"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Thank you, Mr President. Seven months ago – on 23 April to be precise – a large majority in this House refused to grant discharge to the Council’s budget for 2007. Why? It was because the Council’s behaviour in respect of Parliament and the Committee on Budgetary Control was completely unacceptable. The Council refused to answer written questions that we put to it about its budget and refused to meet with the Committee on Budgetary Control and answer questions. The situation was so absurd that representatives of the Council immediately left any meeting at which questions concerning the Council’s budget were asked.
In reality, this was nothing new. It had, in fact, been going on for many years. What was new was that in April, Parliament put a stop to it. I think that in April, most Members asked themselves a simple question: how can I, as a Member of the European Parliament, be responsible to my voters for the Council’s budget if the Council will not even answer the questions put to it by Parliament? I believe that this was the question that resulted in a large majority of Members of this House refusing to grant discharge for the Council’s budget. Perhaps some people thought that Parliament would become more amenable after the elections in June, or that Parliament’s demands for openness and transparency smacked of election promises rather than a real change of attitude. If so, they will have been disappointed.
Even after the election, we on the Committee on Budgetary Control have been united in our very simple stance: if the Council wishes us to grant discharge for its budget, then it must meet with us and answer our questions. At the end of September, something finally happened. On 24 September, a meeting was held between the Council and the Chairman of the Committee on Budgetary Control, the committee’s rapporteurs and the coordinators. At the same time, the Council answered the committee’s questions – albeit indirectly – and these answers were also published on the Council’s website.
Let me make myself clear: that was a smart move by the Council – a very smart move. It is the reason why we on the Committee on Budgetary Control are today able to recommend that Parliament grants discharge for the Council’s budget for 2007. However, let me also clearly state that we both expect and require that this step expresses a change of attitude on the part of the Council with respect to Parliament.
Where the Council’s budget for 2008 is concerned, we do not expect the absurd theatre of 2007 to be repeated. On the contrary, we assume that we will be starting from the point that we have finally reached. In other words, we expect the Council to provide, without undue delay, written answers to questions put by the competent committees and rapporteurs within Parliament. We expect a willingness on the part of the Council to meet with the competent committees and to answer questions.
To ensure that there is no doubt concerning this, it is stated clearly in the report that we are discussing today, and which I hope Parliament will adopt tomorrow – if not unanimously, then with a very large majority. In granting discharge for the Council’s budget for 2007, we have demonstrated our positive attitude. The ball is now in the Council’s court."@en1
|
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples