Guidelines for the 2014 budget: other sections
The European Parliament adopted by 568 votes to 34, with 26 abstentions, a resolution on the guidelines for the 2014 budget procedure, Section I – European Parliament, Section II – Council, Section IV – Court of Justice, Section V – Court of Auditors, Section VI – European Economic and Social Committee, Section VII – Committee of the Regions, Section VIII – European Ombudsman, Section IX – European Data Protection Supervisor, Section X – European External Action Service.
Parliament notes that the agreement on the new multiannual financial framework (MFF) for 2014 to 2020 has still not been reached and, therefore, the ceiling for Heading 5 for the EU’s budget in 2014 has not yet been established.
General framework and priorities for the 2014 budget: Parliament maintains that the institutions should continue to limit or freeze their administrative budgets in solidarity with the difficult economic and budgetary conditions in the Member States. It considers that the 2014 appropriations should be based on a careful analysis of appropriation outturn in 2012 and 2013, with a view to making savings on lines where problems have arisen in implementation. According to Members, real savings and efficiencies can be made by pooling and sharing of human and technical resources, for example in information technology systems, translation, interpretation and transportation services.
Parliament: the resolution states that the Parliament’s budget has been reduced in real terms due to strict budgetary planning and control, the strong commitment of its responsible committee and work reorganisation, notably cuts in travel-related budget lines, reduced length and number of missions, and optimised translation and interpretation services. Parliament encourages the continuation of structural and organisational reforms that aim to achieve greater efficiencies without jeopardising legislative excellence and the quality of working conditions. It supports organisational innovation to improve Parliament's effectiveness and the Members' quality of services and working conditions, including, but not limited to, more efficient structuring of Parliament's working rhythm, and translation and interpretation services, optimal logistical solutions including transport logistics for Members and their assistants, savings in catering costs, improved in-house research assistance, and the continuation and further development of a paperless Parliament and e-meetings.
As regards work carried out in Parliament, the resolution focuses in particular on the preparation of the 2014 European elections. Members call on the Secretary-General to provide information on the costs of the transition arrangements for the previous European Parliament elections and to present a detailed record of how costs have developed to date as they affect the three places of work.
On building policy, Parliament asks for information about the Secretary-General’s findings on, and schedule for, the renovation works and office relocation, including information about an intermediate building for Parliament’s staff, in the coming years, especially in relation to the structural problems in the Paul-Henri Spaak (PHS) building and the acquisition of the Trebel building. Members believe that, in the context of the growing majority among Members in favour of new working arrangements, Parliament’s building projects need to be handled cautiously, and that caution should prevail over ambition. They encourage the continuation of this fruitful dialogue, and ask that the information requested be delivered in a timely manner.
Parliament’s seats: Plenary recalls the decision adopted in plenary calling for the Council to present a roadmap by June 2013 on the multiple seats of the European Parliament, and expects both the committees concerned, the Secretary-General and the Bureau to provide Members with up-to-date figures and information on the financial and environmental impact of the multiple seat arrangement. Plenary suggests that the EP's own impact assessment services examine this question, including with respect to the impact of the Parliament’s presence or partial presence on the respective communities and regions, and present an assessment by June 2013 in order for their findings to be considered in the context of the next MFF.
Other institutions: for the other institutions, Parliament considers any unjustified, across-the-board cuts, and any undifferentiated approach to the institutions’ budgets, as counter-productive. It intends, instead, to continue its case-by-case approach. It repeats the position adopted in previous budget cycles that it expects all the institutions to continue to demonstrate efforts in seeking savings and maintaining a high degree of budgetary discipline when drawing up their budget estimates.