Indiċi 
 Preċedenti 
 Li jmiss 
 Test sħiħ 
Proċedura : 2013/2151(BUD)
Ċiklu ta' ħajja waqt sessjoni
Ċiklu relatat mad-dokument : A7-0347/2013

Testi mressqa :

A7-0347/2013

Dibattiti :

PV 24/10/2013 - 9
CRE 24/10/2013 - 9

Votazzjonijiet :

PV 24/10/2013 - 12.1
CRE 24/10/2013 - 12.1
Spjegazzjoni tal-votazzjoni

Testi adottati :

P7_TA(2013)0450

Dibattiti
Il-Ħamis, 24 ta' Ottubru 2013 - Strasburgu Edizzjoni riveduta

9. Baġit emendatorju nru 6/2013 (dibattitu)
Vidjow tat-taħditiet
PV
MPphoto
 

  La Présidente. - L'ordre du jour appelle le débat sur le rapport de Giovanni La Via, au nom de la commission des budgets, sur la position du Conseil sur le projet de budget rectificatif n° 6/2013 (14870/2013 – C7-0378/2013 – 2013/2151(BUD)) (A7-0347/2013).

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Giovanni La Via, relatore. − Signora Presidente, ministro Rimkunas Commissario Lewandowski, onorevoli colleghi, il bilancio rettificativo n. 6 del 2013, presentato dalla Commissione il 10 luglio e poi modificato dall'amending letter, ammonta a 2,7 miliardi di euro. Esso prevede una revisione delle stime delle risorse proprie, sulla base delle previsioni della Commissione a seguito della revisione delle entrate conseguenti a minori dazi incassati nel corso dell'anno.

La storia di questo bilancio rettificativo è recente, ma si inserisce in un quadro molto più complesso, del quale brevemente cercherò di riassumere gli elementi.

Come ricorderete, in occasione dell'approvazione del bilancio 2013, questo Parlamento aveva fortemente sottolineato una mancanza di stanziamenti di pagamento, quegli stanziamenti di pagamento necessari per poter debitamente pagare e rimborsare con risorse comunitarie ciò che gli Stati membri o i singoli soggetti hanno speso.

Tutto questo, dunque, il Parlamento lo aveva sottolineato e aveva approvato il bilancio per il 2013 solo dopo che in questa sede era stato raggiunto un accordo al più alto livello tra la Presidenza del Consiglio, della Commissione e del Parlamento europeo, cioè fra il Presidente della Commissione Barroso, il Presidente cipriota di turno del Consiglio e il Presidente Schulz. Era stato affermato che era necessario che sin dall'inizio dell'anno vi fosse un bilancio rettificativo in grado di coprire il fabbisogno dei pagamenti.

La Commissione ha mantenuto fede all'impegno perché all'inizio dell'anno ha emesso il suo bilancio rettificativo n. 2 per 11,2 miliardi di euro, ma il Consiglio non è stato in grado di coprirlo integralmente ed ha chiesto a questo Parlamento di dividerlo in due tranche. Una prima, che è stata onorata, e una seconda, per la quale il Commissario ha mandato un altro bilancio rettificativo da 3,9 miliardi, il bilancio rettificativo n. 8. Tutto questo serviva ad assicurare il livello dei pagamenti nel corso dell'esercizio 2013.

Il Consiglio su questo – mi dispiace dirlo – ha una forte responsabilità perché non ha avvertito quella che era l'esigenza dei pagamenti, ha avversato l'innalzamento degli stanziamenti di pagamento in sede di bilancio l'anno scorso e, quando si è trattato di approvare il bilancio rettificativo n. 8, ha avviato una procedura più lunga che, in ogni caso, non ci avrebbe consentito di disporre delle risorse entro la fine dell'anno.

Da tutto ciò è derivata la corsa degli ultimi giorni. L'ultimo weekend nel corso del quale, fra le telefonate incrociate tra Commissione, Consiglio e Parlamento, si è addivenuti alla necessità di sbloccare e far partire subito la corsa per il bilancio rettificativo n. 6 che, deve essere chiaro a tutti, è una ruota di scorta e non la soluzione del problema. Una ruota di scorta per poter andare avanti evitando quello che è stato definito dal Presidente Barroso lo shut down.

Consapevole di ciò, questo Parlamento, con un atto di responsabilità, ha votato in commissione bilancio il bilancio rettificativo, infrangendo tutte le nostre procedure interne, modificando d'urgenza l'ordine del giorno in modo che oggi voteremo o comunque i principali gruppi politici di questo Parlamento voteranno a favore di questo bilancio rettificativo.

Signor Presidente del Consiglio, ciò non toglie che il bilancio rettificativo n. 8 deve essere approvato, e ci attendiamo una rassicurazione in tal senso in occasione del suo intervento. Questo Parlamento la chiede con forza perché senza una rassicurazione che i 3,9 miliardi di euro verranno pagati alla prima occasione utile, aumenterà il livello di dissenso in quest'Aula e diminuiranno sicuramente i voti a favore di questo bilancio rettificativo n. 6.

Vi chiediamo quindi un atto di responsabilità, dandoci le assicurazioni e le garanzie necessarie che i 3,9 miliardi possono essere deliberati dal Consiglio nel più breve tempo possibile affinché si possa, in occasione della prossima sessione plenaria, votare in favore del bilancio rettificativo n. 8, così come dell'MFF.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Algimantas Rimkūnas, President-in-Office of the Council. − Madam President, I am glad that we can have this exchange of views today in Parliament before the definitive adoption of Amending Budget No 6. I hope this debate will contribute to clarifying the extraordinary circumstances under which the amending budget is being adopted.

Last Monday, at the request of the Commission, the Council launched a written procedure for the urgent adoption of Draft Amending Budget No 6. The Council, exceptionally, agreed to engage in such a procedure, under extreme time pressure, following the Commission’s warning that it would otherwise run into serious cash-flow problems at the beginning of November. As you know, the Council successfully completed this written procedure, accepting the draft amending budget and its amending letter, as proposed by the Commission. The Council transmitted its position to Parliament on Monday evening.

I would like to underline that, contrary to some comments made in plenary yesterday, the Council started the examination of this draft amending budget immediately. It was only as a result of a specific request by the Commission and the announcement of an amending letter, presented by the Commission only on 18 September 2013, that the Council did not adopt this position earlier.

On behalf of the Council, I would like to thank Parliament’s Committee on Budgets for its flexibility and very quick reactions, which resulted in a positive vote on Tuesday evening. It might be worth recalling that this amending budget relates exclusively to the revenue side of the EU budget. This has become necessary, as Union revenue from customs duties has fallen dramatically as a result of the economic crisis. Therefore, Member States’ contributions, based on their general national income, have to be urgently increased.

Let me stress that, contrary to the other draft amending budgets, Draft Amending Budget No 6 is not at all related to the expenditure side of the EU budget. Consequently, its adoption will not impact on the amounts proposed in Draft Amending Budgets Nos 7, 8 and 9. I would like to kindly remind you that, ten days ago, the Council reached a political agreement on all outstanding draft amending budgets relating to 2013, including Draft Amending Budget No 6, which we are discussing today.

In accordance with its internal rules, the Council has scheduled the formal adoption of its position concerning Draft Amending Budgets No 8 and 9 for 30 October 2013 at the latest. All these draft amending budgets involve a large amount of money. It is, therefore, necessary to provide sufficient time for national parliaments to examine them, as is foreseen in Protocol No 1 to the Treaty. Nevertheless, for Draft Amending Budgets No 8 and 9, given their importance, the Council has already shortened this period to the absolute minimum. I have to underline that it would have been impossible for the Council to adopt them any earlier than 30 October 2013.

In response to the concerns raised by a few Members, let me make it very clear that the Council remains fully committed to formally endorsing the political agreement reached on the other outstanding Draft Amending Budgets – Nos 8 and 9 – by 30 October 2013 at the latest. The Council will stick to its promises and deliver. On the basis of these decisions, the Council will have approved this year a total amount of EUR 11.6 billion in additional payment appropriations. This significant amount will need to be financed by Member States through higher contributions to the European Union budget, which is not an easy task in these times of economic and financial crisis.

We all share responsibility for the orderly implementation of the EU budget. I sincerely hope that we can count on your support and that Parliament will vote in favour of Draft Amending Budget No 6 today.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Janusz Lewandowski, Member of the Commission. − Madam President, today we have to solve the problem of the 2013 budget. This is not a perfect solution, it is a partial solution, but still a solution demanding goodwill and some understanding. Various serious problems in the implementation of the 2013 budget are the result of under-budgeting for several years. This is not a surprise, even if some claim that it does come as a surprise. It is not a surprise that we have an accumulation in the last year of the financial perspective when all the projects are gaining maturity and all the capitals are sending their bills to Brussels for compensation for eligible projects.

From the very beginning of this year, due to the under-budgeting, I was crystal clear that we need reinforcement for 2013. The number has been very well known since March: 11.2 billion, 7.3 done and what remains is 3.9, which we absolutely need. But the problem, as you know, is that if we have no agreement at this part-session on the overall package, we run into difficulties because we cannot call for money before 16 November and we will start to have cash flow problems only in January. Therefore, we need a second-best solution, a lifebelt for the European budget, and of course it was my responsibility to take the initiative and find the solution via Draft Amending Budget No 6, which is about the revenue side as a candidate for rapid delivery of cash into the budget. This is normally a sort of routine budget, offsetting what is wrong on the revenue side, but this year it is not that routine, because we feel the consequences of the crisis and efforts of rebalancing in many Member States. Therefore, imports are down, customs are down and we have a shortfall of revenues from customs, and net that is EUR 2.7 billion. This is the nature of this revenue type of budget; therefore, I took the initiative, asking the Council and Minister Rimkūnas personally for an emergency procedure. I see that this was a very constructive approach – thank you, Minister – and now I see the same acceleration in Parliament.

This is also a measure of responsibility, otherwise we might stop payments in cohesion and rural development at the end of November. That would not be a good message for Europe. So I thank the rapporteur, Giovanni La Via, for his understanding, and I thank Alain Lamassoure of the Committee on Budgets for giving a recommendation yesterday on the extraordinary session. But I also have to repeat what the rapporteur has already said: we cannot mix that revenue-side rapid reinforcement to overcome the cashflow bottlenecks with what we need still – 3.9 billion – to reinforce expenditure this year. This is coming too late, but we are in need of that additional 3.9 to cover all the obligations of 2013 until the end of October. So both should not be mixed. We are overcoming the bottleneck and see it as the second-best solution.

Of course, we hope for the overall agreement that is urgently needed. We see the concern across Europe. I can only quote the voice of the Council of European Municipalities and Regions this week saying that, at a time at which the economic crisis affects all Europeans, a responsible attitude from Parliament and the Council is necessary. Here is a demonstration of a very responsible attitude towards these urgent needs of the European budget – but please, we need overall agreement as well.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Sidonia Elżbieta Jędrzejewska, w imieniu grupy PPE. – Pani Przewodnicząca! Unia Europejska musi spłacać swoje zobowiązania – po prostu umów należy dotrzymywać. Właśnie w tym duchu Europejska Partia Ludowa popiera i będzie chciała, by przyjąć budżet korygujący nr 6 na rok 2013.

Należy podkreślić, że codziennie Komisja Europejska podpisuje dziesiątki kontraktów na inwestycje, które podnoszą poziom życia Europejczyków. Każdego dnia z tego tytułu tysiące beneficjentów programów unijnych otrzymuje zwrot części poniesionych kosztów. Cały ten system opiera się na stabilności finansów Unii Europejskiej, ale opiera się przede wszystkim na zaufaniu. Nie możemy pozwolić na to, by to zaufanie i ta stabilność zostały zachwiane.

Dziś głosowany budżet korygujący praktycznie oznacza dodatkowe składki dla państw członkowskich w wysokości 2,7 miliardów euro. Jednak trzeba sobie powiedzieć szczerze: te dodatkowe składki nie powinny być zaskoczeniem, ten budżet korygujący nie powinien być zaskakujący ani dla Parlamentu, ani dla państw członkowskich. Od dawna już wiadomo, że budżet unijny jest chronicznie niedofinansowany, chronicznie brakuje w nim pieniędzy na zaciągane zobowiązania, coraz większe zadania, ambicje i działania Unii Europejskiej, które wymagają nakładów, nie mogą być finansowane z coraz skromniejszych składek państw członkowskich. Ten rozdźwięk pomiędzy wielkimi ambicjami a zbyt małą ilością środków jest coraz bardziej widoczny. W Parlamencie Europejskim staramy się rozwiązać na bieżąco najpilniejsze problemy, tak aby utrzymać płynność w budżecie unijnym. Będziemy musieli nadal sprostać problemowi pozostałych blisko 4 miliardów euro brakujących w unijnej kasie.

Mam nadzieję, że uda się nam jak najszybciej znaleźć to porozumienie. Trzeba sobie też jasno powiedzieć, że cały czas nie mamy oficjalnego stanowiska Rady dotyczącego budżetu poprawkowego nr 8 i nr 9, i cała nadzwyczajna procedura, której musimy tutaj sprostać – a będziemy się starali i doprowadzimy dzisiaj do przyjęcia – jest spowodowana tym, że Rada wysłała nam swoje stanowisko dopiero w poniedziałek popołudniu. To wszystko – i to radzenie sobie – pokazuje, że budżet unijny wymaga tak naprawdę pogłębionej reformy.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Göran Färm, on behalf of the S&D Group. – Madam President, colleagues, Commissioner, Mr Minister, there was a heated debate in the Budget Committee this week regarding Amending Budget No 6. Let me, however, emphasise that nobody objected to the contents, which are merely a technical update of the figures for 2013 own resources, BNI contributions, rebates, etc.

The debate instead concerned the procedure, the very sudden adoption by the Council and the equally sudden proposal from the Commission that this must be introduced on this week’s agenda. The background is, of course, the Commission’s acute cash-flow problem and the inability to pay outstanding bills. This has, unfortunately, been caused not by the Commission, as suggested by some conservative members of the Budget Committee, but by the Member States and their constant under-budgeting of payments.

Amending Budget No 6, however, has nothing to do with a lack of payment appropriations. It is only an update of the figures for revenue to be paid by the Member States, but it has an effect on cash-flow. To avoid any suspicion that the Council in this situation would take the adoption of Amending Budget No 6 as an argument for delaying and not adopting Amending Budget No 8, my Group has tabled an amendment in order to link the adoption of Amending Budget No 6 with Amending Budget No 8. The wording needs a minor adjustment, which I will introduce as an oral amedment at the vote.

For this reason, to avoid further misunderstandings, I thank the Presidency and especially Minister Rimkūnas for having made things clear here and for having confirmed that the Council will, as one of the remaining conditions, adopt Amending Budget No 8 in time for this Parliament to give its consent to the MFF in November, thereby preventing another budget crisis. I hope now that nothing can change that promise.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Jan Mulder, namens de ALDE-Fractie. – Ieder parlementslid hier in dit huis is zich bewust van het feit dat overal in Europa bezuinigd moet worden. De lidstaten worden door de Commissie gedwongen hun boeken in orde te brengen en zo veel mogelijk een balanced budget te hebben.

Het is daarom vreemd – en dat is de houding van de Liberale Fractie – dat de lidstaten de Commissie zouden dwingen in een omgekeerde positie, dus wij hebben als grondhouding: als er een verplichting is aangegaan en er rekeningen binnenkomen, dan moeten die rekeningen betaald worden. Welnu, wij hebben vanochtend gepraat over het ontwerp van gewijzigde begroting nr. 6 om een en ander te kunnen betalen; er is namelijk een tekort in de eigen middelen van de Europese Unie. Het is misschien ook goed voor de lidstaten om zich te realiseren dat het stelsel van eigen middelen dat wij nu hebben, duidelijk aan verandering toe is. De gebeurtenissen van de laatste maanden van dit begrotingsjaar zijn daar een aanwijzing voor.

De Liberale Fractie zal vóór het ontwerp van gewijzigde begroting nr. 6 stemmen, mits het amendement van de Socialistische Fractie wordt aangenomen.

Maar voordat wij kunnen overgaan tot de goedkeuring van het meerjarig financieel kader – en dan kan ik alleen maar herhalen wat vele anderen ook al gezegd hebben – is de Liberale Fractie ook van mening dat die 3,9 miljard, het ontwerp van gewijzigde begroting nr. 8, er moet komen. Dat is een strikte voorwaarde en dat geldt ook voor de andere voorwaarden die in de resolutie van juli van dit jaar gesteld zijn. Over de werkgroep voor de eigen middelen moet duidelijkheid komen, vóórdat wij gaan stemmen. Wat is de samenstelling ervan, wie gaat de groep voorzitten en al dat soort zaken, dat zijn geen zaken die ná de stemming kunnen worden opgelost, wij moeten dat vóór die tijd weten. Hetzelfde geldt natuurlijk ook voor de wetgevende arbeid die nog moet gebeuren.

Ik denk dat uit het debat van vanmorgen blijkt – ik heb dat overigens al gezegd – dat wij een nieuw stelsel van eigen middelen nodig hebben en ik hoop dat door de snelle afwerking van deze begroting de Raad zich realiseert dat hij moet meewerken aan een nieuw stelsel van eigen middelen.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Rebecca Harms, im Namen der Verts/ALE-Fraktion. – Frau Präsidentin, Herr Kommissar, sehr geehrter Vertreter der Ratspräsidentschaft, sehr geehrte Kollegen! Ich bin sehr irritiert über den Verlauf der Diskussion, weil in diesem Parlament noch vor einigen Monaten eine große Übereinstimmung geherrscht hat darüber, dass wir uns auf keinen Fall in eine Defizitsituation der Europäischen Union hineinarbeiten wollen. Wir sind der Auffassung, dass das, was für öffentliche Haushalte in den Krisenländern gilt und für die Europäische Union grundsätzlich feststeht, dass man nämlich nicht mehr ausgeben kann, als man einnimmt, auch in dieser Situation gelten sollte.

Selbst wenn man jetzt, wenn ich dieser Debatte so folge, vom Optimum ausgeht, dass beide Nachtragshaushalte, also Nr. 6 und Nr. 8, kommen, ist dieser Grundsatz, dass wir nicht eine Defizitunion sein wollen, nicht durchzuhalten. Wir wissen, dass uns auch mit den Nachtragshaushalten etliche Milliarden fehlen werden. Wir werden mit Geldern des Haushalts 2014 Schulden aus dem Jahr 2013 zahlen müssen. Wir wissen, dass uns 2014 durch den schwachen Abschluss im mittelfristigen Finanzrahmen sowieso Gelder fehlen. Also gehen wir vollbewusst in ein Defizit von ungefähr 20 Milliarden. Schütteln Sie nicht den Kopf, Herr Kommissar, das Missmanagement der Kommission in dieser Auseinandersetzung hat uns auch in diese Drucksituation um die Nachtragshaushalte hineingebracht.

Meine Fraktion hat immer gesagt, dass wir das nicht mitmachen. Wir sind der Auffassung, dass heute über diesen Nachtragshaushalt auf keinen Fall abgestimmt werden sollte. Wir wollen kein Flickwerk in dieser für die Europäische Union grundsätzlich wichtigen Zukunftsauseinandersetzung. Wir haben gestern vorgeschlagen, dass wir, auch wenn der Zeitplan eingehalten werden muss, den Sie uns seit einigen Tagen vortragen, der Auffassung sind, dass man in einer Sondersitzung des Europäischen Parlaments über die gesamte Schieflage debattieren kann. Diese Sondersitzung kann mit ausreichend Zeit einberufen werden. Wir könnten dann auch mal dem eigenen Anspruch gerecht werden, diese ganze klamme Situation den Bürgerinnen und Bürgern der Europäischen Union besser zu erklären. Denn das ist doch das, was gar keiner mehr versteht: Wir spielen hier mit Milliarden, wir arbeiten mit den Überschriften von Nachtragshaushalten, aber wo das Geld fehlen wird, warum das Geld überhaupt so knapp ist in Europa, das wird überhaupt nicht mehr deutlich. Zusätzlich haben wir das Problem, dass die meisten Bürger in der Europäischen Union bis heute denken, dass wir hier aus dem Vollen schöpfen, dass wir mit gigantischen Haushalten immer schlechte Politik machen.

Auch Sie, Herr Lewandowski, sind doch im Verdacht, permanent das Geld zum Fenster rauszuwerfen. Kein Mensch in Europa, auch nicht in Deutschland, hat bis heute verstanden, dass ein mittelfristiger Finanzrahmen über sieben Jahre für die Europäische Union weniger Geld hat als ein Jahr öffentlicher Haushalte in Deutschland. Kein Mensch hat verstanden, dass aus diesem Weniger auch noch das meiste immer noch direkt an die Mitgliedstaaten zurückfließt, und dass wir hier wirklich nicht über unsere Verhältnisse leben, sondern dass wir in vielen Bereichen, gerade im sozialen Bereich, den Mangel verwalten.

Ich plädiere deshalb nochmals dafür: Lassen Sie sich nicht ein auf dieses Flickwerk mit den Nachtragshaushalten! Unterstützen Sie uns in diesem Anliegen auf eine Sondersitzung, damit wir mal über Klarheit und Wahrheit des europäischen Haushalts reden können!

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Richard Ashworth, on behalf of the ECR Group. – Madam President, it seems to me that this debate should be more a question of procedure than a question of substance. It is obvious that, in the short term, we have to find a solution to avert this crisis and avert the risk of shutdown. I am satisfied that the Council has taken the right, appropriate and responsible decisions, and I am confident this House will do so too.

In the longer term, however, we need to think hard about measures we can take to reduce the risk of finding ourselves in this position once again. It seems obvious to me that, because we are working within the constraints of a smaller budget; because we have considerably increased the spending on Heading 1A – something which I welcome and fully support; and because we have not at the same time radically altered spending on other headings, we will find ourselves forced to operate within much tighter budget margins in the future. The likelihood of finding ourselves back in difficulty would thus increase.

Can I take this opportunity, therefore, to encourage the Commission to review the way that information is communicated to the other institutions? Certainly this House, as a responsible scrutiny body, needs better-quality information, and that information needs to be more readily accessible to the Members.

As a last thought, I suggest that it is time to review the architecture of the budget. Take the example of the ongoing liability of the outstanding commitments which we are building up. In the long term, this is an unsustainable liability. Is it not time that we looked at it again?

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Gabriele Zimmer, im Namen der GUE/NGL-Fraktion. – Frau Präsidentin! Meine Fraktion betrachtet nach wie vor den Berichtigungshaushaltsplan Nr. 6 und auch den Berichtigungshaushaltsplan Nr. 8 als ein Paket. Wir sind nicht bereit, der Logik der Kommission zu folgen und zu sagen: Machen wir das eine unabhängig vom anderen. Es gibt diesen konkreten Zusammenhang, und auf diesem Zusammenhang bestehen wir. Wir wollen nach wie vor die entsprechende Garantie haben.

Das heißt, der Änderungsantrag, der von der S&D-Fraktion eingebracht worden ist, ist für uns das Allermindeste, was vom Rat zu akzeptieren ist. Ich akzeptiere z. B. die Aussage nicht, dass der Rat verantwortungsbewusst gehandelt hätte. Das hat der Rat überhaupt nicht! Die Finanzminister haben sich über lange Zeit geweigert, ihren Verpflichtungen nachzukommen, und es gibt für uns über die Logik DAB 6 und DAB 8 selbstverständlich die Verbindung zum Haushalt 2014 und Mehrjähriger Finanzrahmen.

Wir wissen doch schon jetzt, dass der Haushalt 2014 mit 18 Milliarden unterfinanziert ist. Wir wissen, dass 52 % des Haushalts 2014 für die Endfinanzierung der Programme aus dem alten Mehrjährigen Finanzrahmen gebunden sind. Wir wissen, dass durch das Frontloading der Handlungsspielraum von den verbleibenden 48 % noch mehr eingeschränkt wird. Was soll denn überhaupt noch mit dem Haushalt 2014 finanziert werden? Das sind doch die Fragen, die gestellt werden müssen. Und die 3,7 Milliarden sind wirklich das Allerletzte, das kleine Krümelchen, was hier noch zugeschoben werden soll. Und dann wird uns erklärt, letztendlich sollten wir dankbar dafür sein, wenn der Rat am 30. Oktober beschließt, dass er das endlich machen wird. Was ist denn das für eine Show, die hier abgezogen wird?

Das Vertrauen zwischen Rat und Europäischem Parlament ist meines Erachtens am dem Tiefpunkt angelangt. Und es kann doch nicht verwundern, wenn wir hier klare Garantien fordern und sagen, wir lassen nicht mehr Katz und Maus mit uns spielen. Das sollte der Rat auch auf die nächsten Ratstagungen mitnehmen, und selbstverständlich stehen wir für den Änderungsantrag. Meine Fraktion wird sich unterschiedlich entscheiden, auch zur Frage der Abstimmung insgesamt. Aber wir brauchen eine Gesamtdiskussion über die Haushaltsstruktur.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Claudio Morganti, a nome del gruppo EFD. – Signor Presidente, Commissario Lewandowski, onorevoli colleghi, è scandaloso che siano ancora gli Stati membri, ovvero i cittadini, a dover riparare ai vostri errori. Mi chiedo, infatti, come la Commissione abbia potuto sbagliare malamente i suoi conti e per di più non si è neanche assunta la responsabilità di tutto questo.

Le mancate entrate non sono dovute solo alla crisi economica, ma anche al mancato controllo sui grandi porti del Nord Europa, dove entra di tutto e di più senza il pagamento delle dovute tasse e dazi.

Mi chiedo se non sarebbe stato più logico utilizzare altre risorse già previste. Ogni anno, ad esempio, versiamo alla Turchia centinaia di milioni di euro per i fondi di preadesione. Non si potevano congelare questi soldi? Nel prossimo quadro finanziario abbiamo già previsto di destinare ad Ankara e soci diversi miliardi. Rivediamoli subito questi regali.

Questo è solo un esempio ma, signor Commissario, se vuole le mando un'e-mail con l'elenco degli sprechi su cui intervenire, invece di far pagare i vostri errori ai cittadini. Lei e il suo gruppo di burocrati nominati dovreste avere il buon senso di dimettervi per manifesta incapacità gestionale.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Lucas Hartong (NI). - Jaar in jaar uit gaf de Commissie veel te veel uit aan onnodige projecten. Dit Parlement vond het allemaal wel best en deed er vaak nog een schepje bovenop. Het was toch maar geld van de hard werkende belastingbetaler.

Met bakken geld tegelijk verdween het geld in de bodemloze putten.

Opeens kwamen er echter nogal wat onbetaalde rekeningen bij de Commissie tevoorschijn, en wel zó veel dat er geld bij moest voor het jaar 2013. De rekening werd neergelegd bij de lidstaten, bij de hard werkende burger dus. De Raad is terecht boos over al die aanvullende rekeningen. Maar collega La Via legt de schuld niet bij de Commissie, maar bij de Raad. Die heeft veel te weinig geld beschikbaar gesteld. Voorzitter, dit is de omgekeerde wereld! Degene die het geld uitgeeft eist steeds meer omdat hij te weinig krijgt. Werkelijk te gek voor woorden!

Dit Parlement zal ongetwijfeld het verslag La Via goedkeuren. De Socialisten, Christen-democraten en Liberalen zullen buigen voor de eis van de Commissie. De rekening gaat naar de burger: nóg minder geld in de portemonnee, nóg meer feest bij de eurokliek. Voorzitter, zie daar de economische crisis in haar volle omvang, veroorzaakt én in stand gehouden door deze EU.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Janusz Lewandowski, Member of the Commission. − Madam President, thank you for the constructive spirit prevailing in this House. I think the management of budgets, both at national level and at EU level, is now the management of crises and of shortage. I can understand the problems of the national states: 16 of them are in the excessive deficit procedure. Some of them are under special programmes. But they should also understand – and I find that there is understanding of – the logic of the European budget. This is the logic of multiannual programmes. At the end of a financial perspective, we find that problems have accumulated due to under-budgeting in the previous years.

We need to cope with this. At the initiative of Parliament, we have now become very transparent. Also at the initiative of Parliament, we were presenting – and this was in September – an overview. I have to say that Ms Harms is right: we need an additional 3.9, which is the minimum minimorum to cover all the outstanding bills until the end of October. Then the bills coming at the end of December will probably not be covered by the resources of this year’s budget.

This is better controlled, I have to say, than some public expenditure in the Member States, because it is controlled twice: at European level and at national level. But now we must not play the blame game; today we have to find a solution. I find it very encouraging that the spirit of finding a solution in order to overcome the bottleneck in the 2013 budget is so prevalent in this House. Thank you for your spirit, which gives us hope for overall agreement.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Algimantas Rimkūnas, President-in-Office of the Council. − Mr President, I have participated with interest in the debate today and I understand the concerns expressed by many of you. As the budgetary authority, the European Parliament and the Council are equally responsible for the orderly implementation of the EU budget.

We all know at this stage that Draft Amending Budget No 6 is urgently needed and should therefore be adopted without delay. Any other outcome would cause us major problems and would be extremely difficult to explain to EU citizens. I very much hope that the vote will be positive, and I would like to thank you.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Giovanni La Via, relatore. − Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, in primo luogo vorrei ringraziare la Presidenza del Consiglio per le assicurazioni fornite sul bilancio rettificativo n. 9. Naturalmente, restiamo in attesa dei fatti, perché solo nel momento in cui avremo l'approvazione formale e finale potremo essere maggiormente tranquilli e, di conseguenza, decideremo anche per quella che è la nostra responsabilità sul quadro finanziario pluriennale.

La soluzione dell'approvazione del DAB 6 non è sicuramente la migliore delle soluzioni, e mi permetterò di raffrontarla e presentarla a quest'Aula con un esempio figurato. Ogni autovettura ha quattro ruote, tutte e quattro con lo stesso diametro. Mi sembra che la nostra autovettura, che è quella del bilancio europeo, ha avuto bisogno della sostituzione di una ruota. Ma questa ruota non aveva il diametro necessario, bensì più piccolo. La macchina continuerà a camminare, signor Commissario, ma sicuramente non andrà alla velocità alla quale Lei avrebbe voluto spingerla, ma arriveremo alla fine dell'anno.

Questo esempio mi è servito semplicemente per dire che i 2,7 miliardi sono meno dei 3,9, la ruota è più piccola. Ci serviva qualcosa in più e probabilmente ci servivano tutti e due entro quest'anno. Ma non li avremo. Andremo avanti non a velocità di crociera, ma spostando quei pagamenti che, come ben sa il Commissario, è possibile spostare al nuovo anno.

Questo però non è il modo più giusto per gestire il bilancio e le istituzioni europee. Se in futuro dovessimo continuare così, sicuramente non realizzeremo quell'Europa che i padri fondatori avevano sognato e che tutti noi ci stiamo sforzando di portare avanti.

Invito quindi il Consiglio a ricordare che quando si prendono gli impegni bisogna far seguire i pagamenti e chiedo alla Commissione di eseguire, ovviamente secondo le prescrizioni e i ritmi previsti, tutti i programmi comunitari.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  Sonia Alfano (ALDE). - Signora Presidente, onorevoli colleghi, mi scuso con Lei e i colleghi tutti perché il mio intervento non ha attinenza con l'argomento, però chiedo che venga messo a verbale.

Questa mattina, l'auto che trasportava me e la mia assistente è stata assalita dai manifestanti e dai tassisti, circondata da venti persone che vi hanno gettato sopra delle uova. L'auto è tornata indietro due volte, cercando di arrivare al Parlamento. La polizia era lì, ferma a guardare. La seconda volta l'autista, molto spaventato, ci ha invitato a continuare a piedi perché sarebbe stato pericoloso proseguire con la macchina. Abbiamo percorso più di un chilometro e mezzo a piedi, con il cordone di tassisti che ci guardava e temendo di essere riconosciute ed essere oggetto di ulteriori aggressioni.

Adesso il servizio degli autisti e la polizia francese hanno detto al mio ufficio che sarebbe preferibile che io andassi via ora per evitare ulteriori aggressioni perché, a quanto pare, la votazione prevista per più tardi potrebbe essere un problema visto che i tassisti ce l'hanno con gli europarlamentari.

Mi chiedo se questa è civiltà e mi chiedo in base a quale regolamento la Francia voglia mantenere la doppia sede – ci vuole mantenere qui – se non è neanche in grado di difenderci e se la polizia sta a guardare davanti alle aggressioni. Non posso votare, non posso restare qui perché altrimenti rischio un'aggressione.

Chiedo che ciò venga messo a verbale e soprattutto che la polizia francese e le autorità francesi rispondano di questo atteggiamento gravissimo.

 
  
MPphoto
 

  La Présidente. - Nous prenons note de votre intervention, Madame Alfano.

Le débat est clos.

Le vote aura lieu à midi.

(La séance, suspendue à 11 h 45, est reprise à 12 heures)

 
  
  

VORSITZ: RAINER WIELAND
Vizepräsident

 
Avviż legali - Politika tal-privatezza