kfajdsl/voxpopuli huggingface dataset:
an opt in and not an opt out system for member states' regulators would have been more equitable and added to the report's credibility.
madam president whilst it is true that in general the bee population is declining it is also equally true that their importance within agriculture is undervalued by many.
i agree that funding should be made available to research the disease and monitor bee populations across europe.
however i would plea for a balanced view of the decline of the bee population;
we must not use agriculture as a scapegoat for this but actually investigate ways of improving the bee population and the disease and parasites that affect it.
madam president i welcome the report which recognises the different strategies needed from region to region across the eu to combat demographic change.
the report sets out a number of recommendations focusing on suggestions for structural policy reform urban development measures for families the use of the esf to combat youth unemployment and in particular the sharing of best practice between the different regions and nations.
wales as a convergence region welcomes the initiative.
ten years after the resignation of the santer commission and many promises of reform the eu's funds continue to be out of control.
well the treaties clearly specify that the european commission is responsible for the management of the european union funds and in fact it is the only body empowered to stop payments when it does not receive sufficient evidence that the funds are properly spent.
they have been saying this for years but the rules have not changed so should we then blame the european commission for maintaining complex rules that encourage errors?
for the remaining forty eight they give a qualified opinion.
they will say that fraud requires criminal intent and we have to prove this and then we need to call the police.
it is only the money of people who are now struggling to pay their mortgages and educate their children.
the auditors even identified an amount of eur.
on top of the eur one hundred and sixteen billion payments for the year two thousand and eight that have been audited by the court of auditors another eur forty billion has gone out of the european union coffers. thirty five per cent of the budget is now hidden in a balance sheet account under the name of prefinancing'
one five billion that in their own words should not have been paid. the first argument you will hear is that the auditors are not saying that it is fraud but only errors.
it is just taxpayers' money we are dealing with.
such a report would call for the resignation of the board of auditors of any company and its subsequent liquidation but here nobody is worried.
the second argument that you will hear is that the rules are too complex.
the auditors state that the accounts are fair but fail to state that they are true and indeed it is difficult to say they are true if they go on to express concern about the quality of the financial information. the report reveals that ten years after the initiation of the administrative reform the european commission does not operate an integrated accounting system
moreover on the legality and regularity of the eu expenditure the auditors only cleared nine of the expenses for the year two thousand and eight a percentage similar to the past. they give an adverse opinion on forty three of the budget the part that relates to cohesion funds research energy and transport external aid development and enlargement.
the third argument is that it is the member countries which should be blamed for the errors.
these additional advance payments have been made precisely in the areas where the court of auditors found the biggest number of errors.
we can have different assessments different interpretations and different views but the facts must be correct.
this is lost.
the numbers add up. the audit opinion would be clean. but i know i have not always spent my money wisely.
my message to politicians both in our home countries across the eu and in this unnecessary expensive second chamber in strasbourg is that we must stop wasting taxpayers' money.
this is not just a debate about a set of accounts but a fundamental breakdown in trust between the institutions represented here and the people we represent back at home.
if there is one single issue that drives a wedge between british people and brussels it is a perception that their money may be treated frivolously within the eu.
yes it is better than previous years but just as a businessman thinks twice before doing trade with a company that has in any way a qualified opinion so our residents will think twice about their relationship with the eu so long as qualifications remain.
the uk is after all the second largest net contributor to the european budget so other member states might benefit from remembering when they are debating this money that a large part of it comes from british taxpayers' pockets.
the same is true in other countries as well.
ever since i was eighteen years old i have received a monthly statement from my bank.
if we are to deserve even a shred of respect from our taxpayers back at home then in this dire economic time we must treat their money with respect.
payments for external aid development and enlargement also continue to be materially affected by errors with weaknesses in systems for external aid and development assistance mainly at the level of the implementing bodies and delegations.
reducing the level of irregular payments further will therefore require the continuing improvement of supervisory and control systems and where appropriate the simplification of rules and regulations.
in addition as the court has also emphasised simplification should be applied alongside the principles of clarity of objectives realism transparency and accountability when revising or reforming the arrangements for european union
deficiencies in supervisory and control systems related to rural development contributed significantly to the court's overall assessment of systems as only partially effective. the court also gives a qualified opinion to the policy group economic and financial affairs due to errors found in transactions relating to the sixth framework programme for research and technological development.
now. but there is a limit to the reduction of the level of irregularity that can be achieved by improving the effectiveness of supervisory and control
mr president honourable members this is an important moment of renewal for the european union and the intended reforms provide a great opportunity for further improving the financial management of the european
twenty four eight billion reimbursed during two thousand and eight in respect of the two thousand two thousand and six programming period should not have been reimbursed.
court. the court also maintains the view that well designed rules and regulations which are clear to interpret and simple to apply not only decrease the risk of error but can also reduce the costs of
of error rather than specifying the number of checks to be undertaken as is the case
for agriculture and natural resources the court concludes that except for rural development payments were in all material respects legal and regular. this is the first time the court gives a qualified opinion and not an adverse one.
achieved. the areas where the court finds too high levels of errors are those where there are complicated and unclear legal requirements such as eligibility
the past. i believe the court plays a vital role in such circumstances by providing reports and opinions that not only identify existing problems but also make recommendations for the
however delays in approving member states' systems descriptions compliance assessments and audit strategies have slowed budgetary implementation and may increase the risk that control systems do not prevent or detect errors in the start up phase.
however the court considers that member states do not provide sufficiently complete and reliable information on financial corrections to support this claim. and the court found cases of member states replacing ineligible expenditure rejected by the commission with new expenditure which was also ineligible.
the priority remains to address the specific weaknesses the court has found in the areas where the most problems have been detected many of which i have just outlined. particular attention should also continue to be paid to improving the financial correction and recovery mechanisms in anticipation of the closure of the two thousand two thousand and six programming period. in addition the commission should continue to monitor the effectiveness of systems and identify where more could be achieved from existing expenditure
first the court gives an unqualified opinion on the accounts for the second year running.
but the level of irregularity remains too high in some areas. as in previous years for two thousand and eight the court gives an unqualified opinion on revenue and on commitments. the picture for payments however continues to be mixed. for administrative and other expenditure the court gives an unqualified opinion as in previous years.
two this result is mainly due to a high proportion of advance payments in two thousand and eight which have a lower risk of error than interim and final payments.
systems in this area continue however to be assessed as only partially effective.
the third key message of the annual report is that the court's recommendations from previous years on improving supervisory and control systems continue to be valid because the relevant measures are part of an ongoing process where it will take time before they can be deemed to be effective.
the commission has claimed that the correction and recovery mechanisms mitigate the effects of the errors.
controls. however simplification needs to be applied with caution in order to find the right balance between simplification and establishment of policy objectives avoiding unintended side effects such as less focused expenditure.
controls or where it would be appropriate to consider revising the programmes or schemes involved. in the context of such revisions the legislative authorities and the commission should consider trying to set a level of residual risk of irregularity to be achieved by the system that is the tolerable risk
rules. an example of where serious efforts have already been made to simplify the expenditure schemes is agriculture the main area of improvement found by the
spending. the intended proposals for a revision of the financial regulation a new financial framework and a reformed budget will provide opportunities for doing so during the mandate of the new commission.
for the policy groups cohesion research energy and transport and external aid development and enlargement the court continues to give adverse opinions concluding that they are affected by material error although to different levels.
systems. this brings me to the fourth and last key message of this annual report. simplification remains a priority if further significant and sustainable reductions in the level of irregular payments are to be
union. at times of renewal and reform it is also important however to remember the lessons of
thereby contributing to building the confidence and trust of the citizens in the european union institutions.
although there continues to be a material level of error in research energy and transport remedial measures taken by the commission have helped to reduce it. nevertheless legal requirements remain complex and control systems continue to be only partially effective.
in wales the welsh assembly government via the various institutions administers eu structural and cohesion funds and therefore to conduct a formal audit could not be too onerous.
when taxpayers' money is at stake as it is across the eu in the case of the regional budget standards of accountability can never be too high.
mr president i welcome the report of the court of auditors and welcome a clean set of accounts without an adverse report on these accounts for the eu for the first time especially after so many years of falling foul of this important process and a mission that would have put any private company in breach of multiple eu directives.
while the commission may consider it is an achievement that only eleven of the largest part of the budget cohesion spending contained errors i consider it a shocking fact that it has been determined that almost eur five billion of a eur forty six billion budget should never have been paid out as described by the court of auditors.
errors seem to be at the level of implementing institutions and therefore i ask that the european parliament and commission call for the individual member states to provide a thorough audit for the funds received.
i have to say that my region of wales already in receipt of structural funds from that eur forty six billion pot could happily have spent and accounted for the spending of that additional eur five billion.
we need an annual contemporary signing off which can identify errors and ensure compliance to the highest standard.
however i would like to concentrate on the area of continued significant weakness namely the area of structural and cohesion funds.
this can certainly be attributed to the substantial simplification efforts of recent years. thirdly the policy group entitled education and citizenship' has also become green.
for two thousand and eight the report shows a completely clean opinion on the accounts for the second year in a row as a result of the major achievement of the thorough reform and transition to accrual accounting. secondly for the first time agriculture taken as a whole
the commission agrees that we obviously need to be able to count on quality inputs from member states. we see improvements but we are also considering strengthening the legal base to accelerate the process.
the court also reminds us of the essential role of complete and reliable information from all member states on financial corrections.
we need this to prove that multiannual control systems work and to mitigate the effects of the errors detected. the court further recommends that the commission should continue to strive to gain assurance from the annual summaries of all member states as well as from voluntary initiatives by certain member states in the form of national declarations or by supreme audit institutions.
the revision of the financial regulation is currently under consultation and the commission will make proposals in
finally the court emphasises the importance of clear objectives transparent and easy to understand rules and effective supervision. this reduces the risk of error and the costs of control. however it is not something that can be achieved from one day to the next and of course the upcoming reviews of the budget the financial framework and the financial regulation present opportunities not to be
this said the report also clearly charts the work that still needs to be done.
has now become clean and green'.
it has been stated that many of the breaches in compliance are due to a lack of understanding of the procedures and regulations.
mr president i thank the court of auditors in particular for putting forward this morning in a very clear way the contents of a massive report giving us the good and the bad and thankfully not the ugly because to some extent we have cleared up the worst aspects of our accounting practices.
i want to concentrate in particular on agriculture which because it has been given a relatively clean bill of health has virtually been dismissed in this debate.
i do so because i want to caution that we may be going back to the future.
it is worth remembering this morning that agriculture has improved because we have decoupled to a large extent payments from production.
i also worry about how we can account for issues like water management climate change and biodiversity.
think of the complexity of the rules that will surround all these things and rightly so if public money is being spent in that direction and the difficulties and cost of complying with those particular rules.
we are looking at a review of the european union's budget thanks to the former british prime minister tony blair whose government does not have a particularly clean record when it comes to its own sets of accounts.
it is true that the extent of the problem and the means available to remedy it are not identical throughout the whole european community.
the allocation of the budget to the member states as well as the differentiated rates for cofinancing for cohesion and non cohesion countries does of course already take into account the financial capacity of every country.
it would be very hard to find a better and more nourishing food.
it is time we ended this waste.
however gnawing hunger and severe malnutrition deficiencies even without actual hunger is a reality even in the most prosperous member states.
hunger in the midst of plenty is and has always been a scandal and in this report we are trying to improve schemes to address it more effectively.
we rightly talk about it in the context of third countries but rarely acknowledge real hunger in europe.
we should land these so called discards' and give the fish to those who need it but cannot afford high quality protein.
commissioner can you speak to the commissioner for fisheries on the extension of this scheme to include fish?
until now the programme has been financed exclusively by the community budget.
we need to set the same maximum rate for all participating countries not least to make sure that the programme remains efficient and keeps the focus on supplying food.
resto du cur. with more than thirteen million poor people benefiting from the programme with nineteen member states participating and with the scheme being a stable outlet for intervention products this programme has certainly shown its value.
you suggest that storage costs should be covered as well.
i am pleased to note that the report by mr siekierski endorses the commission's approach and agrees that it is necessary to keep the programme within the common agricultural policy.
and from today's debate should therefore be sent a clear message do not forget those waiting in line at the soup kitchen or waiting for the next food package.
this is particularly important at a time when some claim that feeding people has nothing to do with our agriculture policy.
cofinancing will enable the total funds available for this measure to be more in balance with the real needs;
parliament recognised this already in two thousand and six when it called on the council and the commission to place the programme on a permanent footing for the future and to extend the distribution of foodstuffs without restricting it to the products for which intervention applies.
given that charities are heavily involved in the scheme our proposal gives the possibility to reimburse the transport and administrative costs of the ngos.
i am fundamentally in favour of this idea but i cannot agree to your suggestion of leaving it to the member states to fix the rates of reimbursement.
our proposal now includes cofinancing.
i agree that we should do more to guarantee the nutritional quality of the food distributed.
so i believe that cooperation with the un will be very strong.
we are following closely the human rights situation and continue to give support where needed and possible.
the commission aims at the stabilisation of the country the restoration of democracy and rule of law as well as mitigation of the crisis that is affecting mali and its population since.
the moment is particularly timely as the planned presidential elections are only one month ahead.
europe has done much of the international effort to support mali.
europeans have been present in a coordinated manner both through the participation of the eu in the international support and follow up group' and of its member states bilaterally.
the european union the major development partner for mali for decades is also the main international stakeholder in the reconstruction of the country.
the eu has mobilised the means to support the national dialogue commission. a conflict resolution and peace promotion project is currently being implemented.
europe is also active at regional level.
and i may add that despite some critics the european union was actually very quick to adapt to a rapidly evolving situation. our instrument for stability package of eur twenty million put in place in february has made it possible to address urgent needs for security state planning presence
in order to provide long term stability in mali the sources of radicalisation need to be addressed. the eu has to assist mali in addressing the roots of instability and conflict in this country which are complex and run deep.
relying purely on military measures will not solve the problem.
madam president as identified during the conference on mali organised by the eu in february of this year the focus of the eu should be to enable malians to take ownership of a peaceful and democratic solution to the current crisis and to allow them all to participate in the country's economic and political life.
so come on give us some answers because nobody is putting forward constructive proposals.
it is interesting how many different meanings we sometimes attribute to the word solidarity but i think the most important meaning of the word solidarity is that we are not thinking only about ourselves but also about others who are in need of assistance
eurasian union is compatible because here our responsibility and the responsibility of our partners working on the eurasian union is huge because if we fail on this one we might not recreate an iron curtain but we might create a big trade and economic divide throughout the european continent.
let me make one more thing very clear.
this is the only right thing we can do because in the end it is up to them and their ambitions to make the choice as it is up to us also to find the most adequate and most effective response to their ambitions.
issues. i am going to talk about the bigger picture;
with not only as objective an assessment as possible but also clearly defining what we believe are those important steps which need to be taken to bring a peaceful solution.
today. the association agreement is not about making our partners make choices at the expense of their traditional
the panel is not there to investigate all those crimes because that is ultimately up to the ukrainian authorities but this panel is to oversee and make absolutely clear that in pursuing that work the ukrainian authorities are also pursuing
russia. and we also take them seriously when addressing the number of issues facing those who would like to build the south stream and to make it an eu compatible project and i am not talking about politics i am talking about the legislation
she is holding and participating in extremely important discussions about iranian nuclear programmes. it is a time consuming programme.
and the discussions between one part of this house and the second part of this house about a number of important
our policy is not divisive.
you will have to look at the issue of what has happened with the helsinki final act and to what next extent european security is still based on the principles we have been working on for decades.
a choice between moscow or brussels.
no. that was our policy seven and a half years ago and that is our policy
and i would not be standing here if this institution this parliament and member states of the european union were indifferent to the calls of my compatriots to join the european union. i would not be
this is despite the potential for conflict escalation and spill over that threatens the security and stability of the entire region and despite the increased security risk to the uk which we already have seen.
do you not realise that much of europe is dependent on russian gas for winter warmth and that most of the constituents i represent are already struggling to pay their energy bills each month without the added cost of increased wholesale prices?
it is about fighting highly trained and equipped paramilitary forces that have hardly any regard for the needs of the local population.