2002 budget: implementation profile, transfers and Supplementary and amending budgets

The committee adopted the report by Guido PODESTA' (EPP-ED, I) on the implementation profile of the 2002 budget. It issued an urgent call to the Commission to implement the budget as adopted by the budgetary authority, to improve implementation of Community programmes and to adhere to the action plan intended to put an end to abnormal outstanding commitments. The committee wanted more detailed information to be provided by September 2002 on the reasons why the EUR 10 billion refunded to Member States under Supplementary and Amending Budget 2/2002 was not used in 2001, and called for payments to be speeded up. In this connection, it stressed that national administrations also had an important role to play in implementing the budget and called on the Member States not to delay implementation of payment appropriations. At all events, the committee deplored the fact that, because of the rigidity of the system, unspent funds in one sector could not be used to cover needs in another. With regard to transfers, the committee pointed to the cumbersome procedures caused by comitology. In addition, within heading 1 (agriculture), the funds for subheading 1a (market expenditure) were not being spent as planned, in contrast to category 1b (rural development). The Commission should therefore provide further information on this subject. As regards heading 2, the implementation of payments, which was bad enough in this area at the end of 2000, had deteriorated further. The committee issued a reminder that speeding up spending was a constant concern of the budgetary authority and called for the development of a quarterly monitoring process for structural measures. It also urged Member States to cooperate more on using funds for trans-european transport networks (heading 3), while welcoming the beginning of the enlargement pilot project in regions bordering the candidate countries. The committee regretted the poor rate of implementation of certain items under heading 4 (external action) but reiterated its willingness to contribute to the reconstruction of Afghanistan by using the available margin if necessary. It also called on the Commission to provide information about the use of Community funds by Israel and the Palestinian Authority and about the relevant monitoring mechanisms. As regards preparations for enlargement, given that these could not be funded within the current ceiling for heading 5 (administrative expenditure) for 2003, the committee said it was therefore essential to consider bringing expenditure forward from 2003 to 2002. Lastly, with regard to heading 7, the committee believed that the pre-accession instruments Sapard and Ispa should be speeded up so that they could be properly implemented before the first accessions in 2004. �