Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2010-04-21-Speech-3-051"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20100421.3.3-051"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, I am delighted to be here at this debate, even though I was not formally invited. I was not formally invited by Parliament to attend this debate. Despite that, when I learnt that this House and some of its Members were asking for my presence here, it was my great pleasure to come straight away to attend this debate.
I believe that the Council budget for the 2008 financial year was correctly implemented, as can be deduced from the annual report of the Court of Auditors. There have been one or two speeches – Mr Søndergaard’s, for example – that have mentioned transparency, lack of transparency or not enough transparency. I want to be perfectly clear on this: the Council believes that it is absolutely transparent in the way in which it implements its budget and therefore that it correctly applies the requirements that have been made, as demanded by the Financial Regulation.
In addition, as you know, the Council publishes a report on the previous year’s financial management on its website. I would like to draw your attention to the fact that the Council is today the only institution to have published a preliminary report on its 2009 accounts for the general public to see.
Similarly, a few days ago, on 15 March to be precise, the Chair of Coreper and the Secretary-General of the Council met with a delegation from Parliament’s Committee on Budgetary Control. At that meeting, they gave all the information requested on the topics and issues put forward by Parliament’s Committee on Budgetary Control relating to implementation of the Council’s budget for 2008.
Mr Gerbrandy asked about the need to move forward with mutual control by both institutions on budgetary issues without a ‘gentlemen’s agreement’. That is what Mr Gerbrandy said. If Parliament wished to review that agreement, the Council would be willing to consider it and discuss a new agreement based on reciprocity between the two institutions. There is therefore no problem in discussing that situation and perhaps reaching a new agreement that, if possible, improves on the one we have had until now.
That is what the Council would like to point out with regard to the debate held this morning. I am very grateful to you for the oral invitation to come here but, I repeat, I was not formally invited to this sitting."@en1
|
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples