Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2012-10-23-Speech-2-014-000"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20121023.4.2-014-000"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, I would like to tell you that Parliament’s report on the multiannual financial framework (MFF) does not have a small script. We have said very clearly here everything we wanted to say to the Council at this stage. The role of this report is also very clear: to inform the Council, because the Heads of State or Government will be gathering at the end of November – and before Mr Van Rompuy begins consultations with the Member States – and to explain Parliament’s position on the next financial framework, because the Treaty says that the European Council can only adopt a decision with the agreement of the European Parliament. So we have prepared this report to facilitate the debates in the Council and to provide advance information on Parliament’s position, and we hope this is going to be voted for by a vast majority today.
I will say a few words about the priorities and content of the budget. We have the traditional policies here, but we have to make sure that for the next seven years the European budget stimulates growth, the creation of growth and the creation of jobs across Europe. This is the function of the European budget. We are ready to take on board all ideas relating to better spending – to a more efficient spending of the European budget – but we need this budget in order to create jobs and growth, especially for young people. We have on many occasions heard the President of the Commission speaking in this House about youth and employment.
Finally, just one sentence about the procedure. I want to say here in the plenary something that we have said many times to the presidencies. The MFF considers two procedures: the consent procedure for MFF-related issues and the codecision procedure for nearly 70 legal-basis documents. We do not want to see the Council taking the decision on the codecision procedure, which is the right of Parliament. We will insist on the right of this House to negotiate properly with the Member States and with the Council on all the documents related to codecision.
This report is very clear and consistent and generates very significant support, as have all Parliament’s positions on the next MFF for nearly two years now. We have been working in the Committee on Policy Challenges (SURE), as Mr Böge mentioned, and have adopted different resolutions in Parliament. We have demonstrated great cross-party unity on the major principles of the next budget. The major principle is that this is an instrument. This is not an accounting exercise but an instrument to achieve political goals, to apply the provisions of the Treaty and to make the European Union viable.
I also want to thank the Commission, especially Vice-President Šefčovič, Commissioner Lewandowski and the Presidency. The Cyprus Presidency, like the presidencies before, has done an excellent job of including Parliament in the decision-making of the Council this time – or at least we had the opportunity to express our opinion very clearly. My thanks also go to you, the President of this Parliament, and to all my colleagues who have been working on this issue, because it is an issue which really unites this House and makes our voice stronger.
I want very briefly to touch on four points relating to the budget. The first is the size of the budget. I must begin by saying that the Commission’s proposal is not sufficient to finance all the political ambitions that the European Union has set. This is very clear. We have to be aware that the procedure for the next multiannual financial framework is taking place in a very difficult context. We have two challenges – confidence in the European Union and the ability of the European Union to solve these problems, and the need to make fiscal cuts and achieve fiscal consolidation at national level.
But let us see what the rationale for the European budget is. Firstly, it is not generating a deficit. This means that all the rationale for consolidating national budgets due to overspending in previous years does not hold true at European level. Furthermore, the European budget does what national budgets cannot do in these difficult times. This is an investment budget. It does everything that the national budgets are not able to do because of constraints.
Secondly, regarding confidence in the European Union, this budget has a meaning because of leverage, the additional funds that it attracts into investment in the Member States. Ninety-four per cent of the budget goes back to the Member States, and it attracts several times more investment. So a cut of one euro by the European budget would mean a cut of several euros for national, regional, agricultural and competition policies.
We have to be clear when we speak about the size of the budget. We hear very often from representatives of governments that citizens will not accept a higher European budget. We have to point out to them that we have the same voters. Citizens expect European institutions and national institutions to work together and to put forward a mechanism that will propose an exit from the economic crisis and the creation of growth and jobs, using all the instruments both at national and European level. So I would not set national institutions in opposition to European ones in this case. We have a common interest – we are working for the citizens of the European Union.
If some governments need to go back to basic questions such as whether we need more Europe, whether we can do something better at European level than at national level, and whether we are able to set common goals and to fulfil them, then we are ready to re-enter this debate if it is not clear for some governments.
Of course – and Mr Böge mentioned the flexibility of the budget – in a constrained budget, flexibility is not a technical term. It refers to the possibility of really deploying resources in the most efficient way in order to achieve the goals that we have set."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata | |
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples