Mr President, Commissioner, the amending budget we are debating today, practically in private, reveals, as has been stated, a disease endemic throughout the execution of payment appropriations, because, given the amount in question, we are not talking about an exception, but the rule. The 2000 settlement presented a surplus in the payment forecasts of some EUR 11 billion; that for 2001 could end up at around EUR 14 billion, a surplus that will, logically, lighten Member States’ contributions in years to come. Under these conditions, doubts are cast upon these procedures and their legitimate use is undermined. These imbalances are largely concentrated in category 2. We already know that the first few years of the implementation of regional and cohesion policy, the programming phase, takes up a great deal of time, resources and energy. Suffice it to say that the approval of the Community Support Framework for objective 1 regions took place in October 2000, with regard to Spain, and this decision is the prerequisite for cofinancing. The results of the 2001 consumption of payments, under this heading, produces some worrying information. The rate of implementation dropped 10 points in relation to the previous year and, with regard to the total intended for objective 1 regions, it dropped 6 points. The final result is therefore a considerable increase in the RAL. The current regulations of the Structural Funds should, therefore, be analysed in the light of this. Faced with enlargement, it should be improved to allow better financial management of the programmes for obvious reasons: because regional policy is at the heart of the European project and is fundamental for the progress of the integration process, and because it is a key instrument that enjoys the widest consensus. Similar problems, but involving lower figures, arise in headings 3 and 4: consumption of payments in external actions in 2001 also dropped 5 points in relation to the previous year – to be specific, initiatives promoting democracy and human rights only reached 56% of the anticipated payments. I believe, Madam Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, that Parliament’s amendments have no other purpose than to temporarily slow down a saving that, to a large extent, is of a transitory nature for the Member States and does not aim to hinder the management of financial flows in Member States, but to remedy a situation that is neither politically nor financially reasonable. Firstly, the Commission should improve its working systems both in the preparatory phase and in the execution phase. In this regard, the difficulties in payments anticipated for 2003 should be resolved satisfactorily. Secondly, the Council should understand that Parliament exercises its competencies as budgetary authority with all that this implies and that this modified amending budget means that, even when, with regard to own resources, Parliament is not on an equal footing with the Council, in this and in other areas that are currently being discussed, what citizens are asking for is a stable institutional balance and a dialogue which obtains practical results, because there are no other alternatives that would produce improved benefits for all.

Political group: PPE-DE