Resolution on the Communication from the Commission on Agenda 2000: the 2000- 2006 financial framework for the Union and the future financing system (COM(97)2000 C4-0372/ 97)
Date: 1997-12-04
Institutions: Committee on Budgets, European Parliament
Subjects: Central and Eastern Europe, Central and Eastern European countries, Community budget, EU financing arrangements, EU policy, accession to the European Union, enlargement of the Union













EUR-Lex - 51997IP0331 - EN






Avis juridique important




|



51997IP0331

Resolution on the Communication from the Commission on Agenda 2000: the 2000- 2006 financial framework for the Union and the future financing system (COM(97)2000 C4-0372/ 97)  


Official Journal C 388 , 22/12/1997 P. 0031 





A4-0331/97Resolution on the Communication from the Commission on Agenda 2000: the 2000- 2006 financial framework for the Union and the future financing system (COM(97)2000 - C4-0372/97)The European Parliament,- having regard to the Commission communication, COM(97)2000 - C4-0372/97,- having regard to the report of the Committee on Budgets and the opinions of the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development, the Committee on Budgetary Control, the Committee on Research, Technological Development and Energy, the Committee on Institutional Affairs, the Committee on Civil Liberties and Internal Affairs, the Committee on Regional Policy, the Committee on Fisheries, the Committee on Culture, Youth, Education and the Media, the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Protection, the Committee on Development and Cooperation and the Committee on Employment and Social Affairs (A4-0331/97),A. whereas the 1993 Interinstitutional Agreement and the financial perspective annexed thereto expire in 1999,B. whereas, in view of the opening of the procedure for revising the financial perspective which should begin in the first half of 1998, the financial framework for the period after the year 2000 should be determined in the context of planned political developments,C. whereas the extension of the Union to the applicant countries represents a further step towards consolidating the emergence of a united, free Europe,D. whereas it will not be possible for this process to be brought to a successful conclusion unless all the countries applying for EU membership can be incorporated into Community policies and unless those policies can be used to assist the economic development of those countries and their integration into the Union,E. whereas the new financial perspective should respond to the increased needs of economic and social cohesion in view of enlargement and the conditions imposed by economic and monetary union,F. whereas it is essential for the Union to have sufficient resources not just to bring the process to a successful conclusion but also to be able to continue and develop European integration beyond 1999,1. Notes the Commission communication which sets out Europe's political framework and financial requirements for the next seven years, but considers that this does not exempt it from submitting a formal financial perspective proposal for the 15 Member States by 1 July 1998, as laid down in Article 25 of the current Interinstitutional Agreement;The macro-economic bases2. Notes that the Commission's view that 1.27% of GDP is enough to meet the challenges facing the EU over the period 2000-2006 depends on its assumptions about GDP growth, reform of Community policies and the outcome of the enlargement process; considers that a periodic reassessment of such data is called for in order to make sure that the Commission's estimates reflect the true implications of enlargement;3. Takes the view that the growth forecast of 2.5% per year could be an overestimate which may give rise to false hopes regarding the possibility of initiating such a momentous historic process without incurring extra cost;Duration of the financial perspective4. Recognizes the value of annexing to the Agenda 2000 communication a financial framework covering a sufficiently long period; considers, however, that even if this framework should prove too long for some financial perspectives, the very success of enlargement will undoubtedly require the budgetary peace of mind which an Interinstitutional Agreement accompanied by the relevant financial perspective can give;5. Considers, therefore, that the duration of the next financial perspective will depend mainly on the flexibility incorporated into the new Interinstitutional Agreement, either between headings, or by means of a binding revision clause, so as to take into account the uncertainty of future developments;6. Emphasizes that any new financial perspective (revenue and expenditure) must be revised automatically once one or more applicant countries sign the accession to the Union and, likewise, if appropriate reforms of the agricultural and structural policies are not realized or if the estimated rate of growth is not attained;7. Considers that, when this revision is carried out, checks will also have to be made on the state of the negotiations and the results of a possible IGC on reform of the institutions;8. Points out that, in the absence of an agreement between the institutions on revision of the financial perspective, the budget procedure can always be conducted pursuant to Article 203 of the EC Treaty;The own-resources ceiling9. Notes that, in its communication, the Commission has not really estimated the future Community policy requirements for the 15 existing Member States and for the applicant countries but has merely declared the current own- resources ceiling of 1.27% of GNP to be sacrosanct;10. Considers this approach to be inadequate for such an ambitious project; takes the view that a thorough analysis of the situation leads to the conclusion that declaring the own-resources ceiling to be sacrosanct at this stage is premature and may cause genuine problems to be underestimated, even though it might have the advantage of avoiding a debate within the European Council;11. Considers that the current own-resources ceiling will only enable the financial perspective to be financed after enlargement if the Council takes the decisions for which it is responsible regarding reform of existing policies;The own-resources system12. Stresses that Agenda 2000 does not propose changing the Community's system of funding, makes no mention of the need to ensure financial independence for the Union and does not create any financial link between the taxpayer and the European institutions;13. Regrets the fact that the Commission has sought to avoid the inescapable question of the own-resources system; considers that the time has come to demonstrate imagination and political courage in tackling the revision of a system which, although it has the merit of having enabled the Union to be financed, no longer seems able to ensure that the European tax burden is fairly distributed;14. Considers that an analysis should be undertaken of the potential of a system which is more proportionate to the relative prosperity of the people of Europe and with a higher profile for European citizens;15. Considers that the application in the budget of what is known as the 'fair return' principle should be excluded; underlines that all budgetary and non-budgetary benefits gained from participation in European integration should be taken into account, in particular the objective benefits resulting from the internal market and the prospect of enlargement;16. Calls on the Commission to submit, in the near future, a communication concerning the own-resources system so as to promote a debate between the two arms of the budgetary authority and so that a decision can be taken before the forthcoming accession negotiations and the possible Intergovernmental Conference are concluded;The Interinstitutional Agreement17. Points out that, ever since it was adopted, the financial perspective has supplemented the Interinstitutional Agreements which, since 1988, have enabled the budget procedures to progress satisfactorily; considers, however, that improvements are needed to ensure that the procedures contribute even more to the smooth running of the institutions and that they are more in accordance with the institutional balance provided for in the Treaties;18. Considers that the submission of the forthcoming proposals regarding the financial perspective should be accompanied by a revision of the Interinstitutional Agreement which should make it possible, inter alia, to get rid of certain cumbersome features through greater flexibility, limited revision of the headings and the elimination of the remaining anachronisms in the procedures, such as the classification of expenditure; it should also include the option of not repaying unused appropriations to the Member States but of investing them in a special reserve chapter; such appropriations could then be used firstly for unexpected developments within the Union and secondly for the process of enlargement;19. Calls on the Council and the Commission to undertake to draw up, in connection with the negotiations on the forthcoming Interinstitutional Agreement, a proposal for a revision of the budgetary procedure in order to ensure that it works in the context of an enlarged Union;The financing of enlargement20. Notes that the Commission has submitted an estimate for the amount needed following the accession of the applicant countries; draws attention to the fact that this amount - including the estimates of all costs of any transitional period - is only for guidance and that it will not be possible for its true size to be calculated until the end of the accession negotiations;21. Notes furthermore that, according to the Commission, the margins which will have to be released, in the absence of extra resources, to enable enlargement to go ahead can only be made available by means of major cutbacks in existing policies, in particular agriculture and the Structural Funds;22. Considers that only after the adoption of the reforms by the Council will it be possible to assess the actual savings made and that the exact cost will not be known until the negotiations have been concluded; considers, therefore, that only then can a definitive decision regarding the possible retention of the current own-resources ceiling be taken;23. Proposes that all accession expenditure should be entered under a new heading of the financial perspective;24. Calls on the European Council to consider alternative ways of financing enlargement should the Council's decisions regarding the Commission reform proposals result in smaller savings than those envisaged by the Commission, should the number of acceding countries change or should the accession timetable differ from the one envisaged by the Commission;Policy reform25. Acknowledges the need to reform certain agricultural policy and Structural Fund mechanisms but considers that the purpose of such reforms should be to improve the effectiveness of these Community policies in order to make them more appropriate to the general situation (i.e. the WTO), the economic development of the regions and the new challenges of our times (unemployment);26. Calls on the European Council to acknowledge the risks which could be created by a policy reform dictated solely by the need to marshal resources in the absence of any political perspective or vision, and to state straightaway what it intends the objectives of those reforms to be;Sectoral considerationsAgriculture27. Notes the retention by the Commission of the agricultural guideline, stresses the need to maintain a medium-term agricultural policy, and is aware that the success of enlargement is linked both to the ability of the applicant countries to develop their agriculture and to that of the Union to adapt its own agriculture without renationalizing the CAP in the process and penalizing the whole of European production;Fisheries28. Calls on the Commission to develop proposals for a coherent, horizontal structural strategy for fisheries, which should be presented at the same time as those relating to the detail of the reform; stresses the need in this connection to avoid reinforcing the imbalances between regions highly dependent on fisheries, and hence to seek alternative solutions which retain the horizontal character of the measures;Environment29. Takes the view that, with regard to the worrying scale of the environmental problems in the applicant countries and the associated high rehabilitation and investment costs, a wide range of support and financing options should be used, including:- making available appropriate funding to deal with the most urgent environmental problems such as drinking-water supplies, waste-water treatment, waste management, transport and energy supplies;- solving structural problems, with priority for aid to the energy sector and the urban environment;- encouragement for the setting up of joint ventures between industries in the Member States and the applicant countries, bearing in mind that environmental and consumer protection considerations have to be incorporated in all EU policy areas under the terms of the EC Treaty;- examining the possibility of setting up, in cooperation with the EBRD and the EIB, guarantee funds for banks in central and eastern European countries to grant loans for environmental projects, especially for small and medium-sized companies and local and regional authorities;Regional policy30. Agrees with the Commission on the need to improve substantially the results, efficiency and value for money of structural policies; supports, by and large, the Commission's emphasis on greater concentration, simplification and partnership, but is concerned that allocating as much as 10% of funds on the basis of performance might lead to difficult subjective choices and increased bureaucracy; is equally concerned that the Commission proposal for a reserve is not as yet based on a workable and objective concept;31. Believes that enlargement is a historic opportunity and that the costs of enlargement should be borne equitably by all Member States, while maintaining solidarity with the regions, but notes that, under the new Commission proposal, the figure of 0.46% of GNP, as laid down for the cohesion policy of the Fifteen, will gradually be reduced to 0.39% for the present fifteen Member States in the year 2006;Employment32. Observes that the draft Treaty of Amsterdam establishes new obligations for the Community in the field of employment, encouraging cooperation between Member States, supporting and 'if necessary complementing their action'; in the light of the persistent threat of unemployment and poverty considers that the new financial framework should provide a wider margin of manoeuvre for developing new instruments aimed at promoting employment;33. Urges the European Council to ensure that any employment initiative for SMEs launched at its November 1997 meeting avoids any duplication of existing programmes in this sector; requests that job-creating initiatives, in particular for SMEs, should be brought together within a single heading of any new financial perspective for 1999;34. Supports the increase of allocations for priority programmes for internal policies at a faster rate than the rest of the budget; recalls that this must be done in a regionally and socially just manner and in accordance with the principle of mainstreaming;Culture, education and youth35. Takes the view that with an eye to the year 2000 the status of the educational and cultural sectors in an enlarged Union will need to be boosted to the extent that:- they help strengthen the foundations of Community solidarity and the feeling of belonging to the same entity;- they represent priority sectors for intangible investment with a direct and indirect impact on employment;- they contribute to strengthening the practice of democracy, particularly by encouraging the development of clubs and associations;Civil liberties36. Emphasizes that the considerable needs identified by the Commission in all the applicant countries in the area of justice and home affairs, especially concerning the establishment of efficient and democratic institutions (police and justice), the fight against organized crime, money laundering and corruption, efficient border controls and asylum procedures require substantial financial input prior to accession;Research and energy37. Takes the view that Union support for research and technological development must continue to be a priority task with a view to improving the competitiveness of European industry, creating jobs and contributing to growth and sustainable development; recalls its resolution of 15 November 1996 ((OJ C 362, 2.12.1996, p. 327.)) on the incorporation of the ECSC into the budget of the European Union, which the forthcoming financial perspective must cater for;38. Regrets that in Agenda 2000 the Commission fails to assign a major role to energy policy and regards measures to improve nuclear safety and Euratom standards as essential;Transport39. Takes the view that the extension of the trans-European networks to the Central and Eastern European countries and the Mediterranean countries is of the greatest importance for the gradual integration of these countries in the European Union;Development40. Regrets that there is no reference to development policy in Agenda 2000, which means that the intentions of the Commission in this policy field will remain unclear and ill-defined; regrets likewise that the Commission has failed to initiate a debate;41. Stresses that an enlarged European Union has an even greater role to play at the global level and an even greater responsibility to the Third World, and that the image of a European Union that only protects its own interests cannot be justified; takes the view that budgetary constraints must not lead to this commitment to third countries being abandoned;42. Repeats its call for budgetization of the European Development Fund as being all the more important in that it could give the European Parliament new means of action to further the EU's commitments and the objectives of its development policy;Budgetary control43. Considers that the Commission must make the granting of pre-accession funds and any other Community funds conditional on the implementation by each beneficiary, in the framework of the 'accession partnership', of a binding programme designed to give each country which does not already have one:- a high-quality administrative management and internal supervision system and an autonomous, effective external system of supervision;- an appropriate administrative and legal mechanism for protecting Community financing;- intensive training of taxation and customs services with a view to enlargement;- an arrangement providing for cooperation with the European Court of Auditors;The resources of a broader, stronger Union44. Firmly believes that enlargement of the Union must go hand-in-hand with a stronger Europe with an increased presence in the world which is more committed to resolving the problems affecting 'global society' and has greater political authority supported by adequate financial resources;45. Considers, therefore, that the European Council should demonstrate greater openness towards enlargement of the Union, given that when all is said and done, according to the figures submitted by the Commission, the resources required for enlargement represent only 0.13% of the estimated GNP of the 15 Member States for the whole of the period in question;46. Instructs its President to present this resolution to the European Council of 13-14 December 1997 and to forward it to the Community institutions and the parliaments of the Member States.