Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2009-12-15-Speech-2-040"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2009-12-15"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Draft general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2010 as modified by the Council (all sections) - Draft amending budget No 10/2009 of the European Union for the financial year 2009, Section III – Commission - Mobilisation of the Flexibility Instrument - Amendment to the multiannual financial framework 2007-2013: financing energy projects under the European Economic Recovery Plan (debate)2
dcterms:Language	"de"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20091215.7.2-040"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2009-12-15-Speech-2-0412
lpv:speaker	lp:Ingeborg Grässle2
lpv:spokenAs	member; BUDG (2009-07-16--2012-01-18)3 substitute; EMPL (2009-07-16--2012-01-18)3 member; Delegation for relations with the Palestinian Legislative Council (2009-09-16--2014-06-30)3 member_of_the_bureau; EPP (2009-07-24--2014-06-30)3 member; CONT (2009-07-16--2012-01-18)3 unknown; Christlich Demokratische Union Deutschlands (2009-07-14--2014-06-30)3 substitute; Delegation for relations with Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Serbia, Montenegro and Kosovo (2009-09-16--2014-06-30)3 member; Delegation to the Parliamentary Assembly of the Union for the Mediterranean (2009-09-16--2010-03-09)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, Commissioner, Mr Lindblad, ladies and gentlemen, I would like to pick up on the call made by Mr Garriga for realistic budgets. What are the costs of the Treaty of Lisbon? This has become a very urgent problem. Why can we not be more realistic with regard to the Structural Funds? They have become our sacred cow. We already have outstanding appropriations from a period of two and half years which have not been discharged and we are piling up at least a further EUR 30 billion on top of these appropriations. We have a problem in the Balkans, where countries are preparing for accession to the European Union. As a result of negative resolutions from the socialists and liberals, we have little interest in finding out what is really happening in the Balkans. How are the different EU institutions in Kosovo, for example, of which there are now large numbers, working together? These were all important amendments which this House has rejected and which I believe we should all follow up on, because we have a job to do there. Where is the progress in the progress reports? We have voted in favour of the report of the Court of Auditors in which we called for a traffic light system, but the Committee on Budgets later refused to lend its authority to this system with corresponding reserves. All of these things are contradictions and, in my opinion, the House is not yet prepared to be realistic or to lend its authority to its own resolutions. I would like to call for a realistic approach to Kozloduy. The special report from the Commission on the use of EU funds in Bulgaria until this summer did not mention Kozloduy, although it has received money from PHARE. Up to the end of 2009, at least EUR 602 million was spent on Kozloduy. I have tried to find out what happened to the money and I have discovered that nothing has yet been closed down. Plans have simply been made for managing the decommissioning process. Kozloduy has demonstrated to me how little the Commission knows about what is happening with our money. It also demonstrated that the numerous subsidiary budgets which have come into existence make it more difficult to control the situation and also result in the Commission losing its overview. Therefore, we should at least stop pressing for the subsidiary budgets, because the result is that we ourselves no longer have any idea what is happening."@en1
lpv:videoURI	<go to Events_and_structure europarl>2

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph