31.5.2011   

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 161/258

A.

whereas in order to fulfil its tasks under the Treaty the Parliament is aiming to use and develop fully its prerogatives and whereas this will necessitate the strengthening of a number of priority areas while, at the same time, requiring a stringent approach to the use of available resources,

B.

whereas, in this regard, the budgetary situation with respect to heading 5 (administrative expenditure) for 2011 warrants more than ever a careful and disciplined approach to Parliament’s budget in order to reconcile the political goals and their financing,

C.

whereas a pilot process of enhanced cooperation between the Bureau and the Committee on Budgets was initiated two years ago and has been maintained for the 2011 procedure,

D.

whereas the prerogatives of the plenary in adopting the estimates and the final budget will be fully maintained in accordance with the Treaty provisions and the Rules of Procedure,

E.

whereas two pre-conciliation meetings between delegations of the Bureau and the Committee on Budgets took place on 24 March 2010 and 13 April 2010 during which a number of key issues were discussed by the two delegations,

1.

Notes that the level of the 2011 budget, as suggested by the Bureau, amounts to EUR 1 710 547 354, representing 20,32 % of heading 5 of the multiannual financial framework (MFF); notes that the rate of increase suggested is 5,8 % over the 2010 budget, including the Draft amending budget (DAB) No 1/2010;

2.

While fully aware of the challenges ahead, takes the view that the growth rate and final level of the budget need to be adjusted in these estimates; decides that at this stage, the overall level of the budget is EUR 1 706 547 354, which represents a rate of increase of 5,5 % and represents a percentage share of 20,28 % of heading 5; also aims to clarify various issues and further examine the measures proposed, as well as to identify savings, before establishing the final budget in autumn 2010;

3.

Recalls its view that, on the basis of the original MFF references negotiated in 2006 and in force since 2007, its expenditure should be established around the traditional 20 % limit, taking into account the needs of the other institutions and the available margin; notes in this regard the requests by the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of Regions for over EUR 10 million for the year 2010 only; reiterates that the European External Action Service may also have an impact on heading 5; confirms its view that the Bureau and the Committee on Budgets have to work together to re-assess this limit before opening an interinstitutional dialogue on the matter; suggest that a working group be set up for this purpose, which should begin its work before the end of July 2010;

4.

Seeks clarification on the mid-term financial programming for heading 5 and the projected margins of EUR 109 million for 2011, EUR 102 million for 2012 and EUR 157 million for 2013; considers that it would be helpful to receive information on Parliament’s working hypotheses for the sixth report of the secretaries-general (October 2009) in terms of budget and posts compared to the proposal for estimates now at hand; would like to clarify which significant (potential) projects and staff developments are already included in this programming for the next 2-3 years; underlines, at the same time, that the financial programming is only a non-binding indicative planning tool and that the budgetary authority takes the final decisions;

5.

While not disagreeing with the principle reasoning of a 1 % share of the budget as a reasonable contingency reserve for unforeseen expenditure, agrees with the Bureau’s proposal, taking into account the very restricted situation in heading 5, to set this reserve at EUR 14 million;

6.

Understands that, in relation to the case on salaries pending before the Court of Justice, the total ‘effect’ for Parliament in 2011, which could amount to some EUR 12 million in the event of a ruling in the Commission’s favour, is included as a provision, across various budget lines, in the proposal;

7.

Recalls its previous demands that a full budget proposal should be presented at the estimates stage in the spring and would consequently expect only minor or technical changes in the so-called ‘amending letter’ in the autumn;

8.

Re-emphasises the importance it attaches to close cooperation between the Bureau and Committee on Budgets in jointly clarifying the budgetary consequences of decisions to be taken; stresses, also, that within each decision-making body, the use of financial statements giving a clear presentation of all the budgetary consequences to members is crucial;

9.

Welcomes and approves the financing of the Bureau’s suggestions in relation to these measures, i.e. the creation of a specific reserve for the 18 Members, at EUR 9,4 million;

10.

Can agree with the Bureau’s focus on reinforcing expertise to contribute to the objective of legislative excellence;

11.

In this regard, supports the idea of finding an appropriate mix of in-house and external expertise for the policy departments depending on the type of information required for the specific files under consideration but would like further explanations as to whether and how the staff increases proposed could be used in a flexible way and wishes to receive more information on past implementation rates and demand from committees for such expertise;

12.

Welcomes the fact that the Bureau took into account concerns raised over the ratio of ADs to ASTs, resulting in a decrease of 3 AST posts, compared to the initial proposal; approves the appropriations for the creation of 19 AD5 and 13 AST1 posts for the policy departments as now suggested by the Bureau;

13.

Endorses the need for a reinforcement of external studies and welcomes the agreement between the Bureau and the Committee on Budgets to set the additional amount at EUR 1,7 million;

14.

Notes the proposal to boost the library by 28 posts, out of which 13 for the briefing service for members (previously contract staff); can endorse the financing and incorporation of these 13 posts into its establishment plan provided an assurance is given that they will be filled following open competitions and that a corresponding saving is made in the financial envelope for contracts; considers that a further strengthening in terms of funds and human resources of the existing information services should go hand in hand with the development of a user-friendly system, which would allow Members to have easy access to all the information produced in the house; decides to enter the appropriations for the 15 additional posts in the estimates but places half of this amount in reserve pending:

15.

Considers that awareness and visibility for the two above indirect support services, including through Parliament’s web pages, should be ensured for the benefit of Members;

16.

Recalls its resolution on the guidelines in which an evaluation was already called for, including a detailed financial statement of the overall costs that would result from the proposed increase of the assistance allowances; therefore decides to introduce in reserve the corresponding appropriations;

17.

Welcomes the provisions for enlargement to include Croatia and approves the corresponding appropriations and staffing measures;

18.

Notes that apart from the requests for 68 posts linked to Lisbon and 62 linked to enlargement (including 11 posts for the groups), 17 posts are requested to complete the second year of the three-year plan for DG INLO agreed in the 2010 procedure and 30 posts for other areas that could not be covered even after 20 redeployments had been identified as possible for 2011, bringing the total to 180 new posts; requests more detailed information on the posts redeployed or transferred as from the beginning of the legislature, including estimates of redeployments and transfers for 2010 and, where possible, 2011; decides to enter the appropriations for the creation of these posts in the estimates but places the amount linked to the creation of 30 posts for ‘other areas’ in reserve pending the analysis of the information requested;

19.

Notes that the Bureau proposal now also includes 1 AD5 and 1 AST1 for the Euro Mediterranean Parliamentary Assembly and 3 AD5 and 1 AST1 posts for Risk Management but no longer contains a planned additional EUR 3 million for DG ITEC;

20.

Also notes that the Bureau has included a further 56 posts for political groups;

21.

Approves the 2011 measures and posts as put forward for the second year of DG INLO’s three-year programme agreed last year;

22.

Wishes to receive more information on the allocation of contract agent’s appropriations and an overview of net-costs or net-savings to the contract agent’s envelope, resulting from granted increases to its establishment plan, especially in relation to internalisation of various functions in the fields of security, ICT and library;

23.

Emphasises that a reasonable buildings policy is intimately linked to the 2011 procedure and, also to the general question of a sustainable budget;

24.

Welcomes the Bureau Decision of 24 March 2010 that addresses Parliament’s request for a medium to long-term property and buildings policy; expresses initial concern about the feasibility of pursuing in parallel all current and planned building operations that could emanate from the medium to long-term building strategy; is not clear over how the multitude of projects fit in with the MFF and asks for the necessary clarifications;

25.

Notes in this regard the Bureau’s proposal to utilise EUR 85,9 million of assigned revenue (to be used within the area of Parliament’s buildings policy) for Members’ offices in Brussels; recalls that any building project likely to have significant financial implications for the budget is subject to consultation of the budgetary authority under Article 179(3) of the Financial Regulation; recalls furthermore that with regard to carry-overs the Financial Regulation stipulates that assigned revenue carried over must be used first; welcomes in this context the fact that Parliament, through the reimbursement of EUR 85,9 million by the Belgian State, will be in a position to bring forward new building projects and thus accelerate the implementation of part of its medium-term property strategy;

26.

Cannot agree to reserve this assigned revenue for this particular building project;

27.

Calls for the resources required for medium-term property planning to be entered in the budget in future; also calls for a separate budget line to be created for large-scale property projects, in order to facilitate medium-term financial planning for building projects and to increase transparency;

28.

Notes that a provision for a direct pre-financing of the initial stage of the construction of the new KAD building has been made for an amount of EUR 10,2 million on the budget line for lease payments in the Bureau’s proposal; recognises that such a voluntary pre-financing would help reduce the financing costs but, taking into account the extremely tight situation for 2011, decides to enter a lower amount of EUR 6,2 million for this purpose in the estimates; is willing to reassess this amount in autumn 2010 based on an update of the budgetary situation and developments in Parliament’s building policy;

29.

Attaches importance to the in-depth review on security policy announced by the Bureau and, in this regard, recalls its attachment to a prudent use of resources and, particularly, a cost-effective balance between internal staff and external agents; asks the Bureau to carefully examine the operational and financial implications of a new strategy, aiming to strike a good balance in the proposals to be made between security concerns on the one hand and accessibility and openness on the other hand; stresses that Parliament should remain as much as possible an open and accessible institution; for this reason wishes to receive more information from the administration concerning the so-called ‘Wiertz project’ in order to assess its implications relating to the accessibility of Parliament for the public;

30.

Welcomes the more structured approach to ICT and the elaboration of a comprehensive strategy in this field; also reiterates its support for a sufficient internalisation of functions to reduce the dependence on external providers; notes, however, that new posts were already given three years in a row; therefore considers this an issue to be clarified;

31.

Notes that EUR 5 million is earmarked for a Members’ IT mobility project and, in particular, to cover mobile communications; would like to receive more information given the relatively high amount;

32.

Welcomes the modest increase in funding to implement the EMAS and CO2 reduction measures, spread across the entire budget, and underlines further the importance it attaches to this issue;

33.

Notes the evolution of key performance indicators since 2006 in this respect as included in the Environmental Management Review for the year 2008, notably a reduction in carbon footprint of 12,9 %, a decrease in electricity consumption of 0,8 %, an increase in gas/oil/ heat consumption of 7,4 % in 2008, after a decrease of 17,5 % in 2007, an increase in mobility/ transport emissions of 8,8 %, an increase in the percentage of recycled waste from 49,8 % in 2006 to 55,4 % in 2008, an increase in water consumption of 18,1 % and a decrease of paper consumption of 16,9 %;

34.

Welcomes the budgetary annex on environmental management which gives a good technical overview of the budget items involved; would also welcome, in this context and in the same annex, the inclusion in the annual EMAS reports of more information on the differentiated carbon footprint of the Parliament’s buildings in Strasbourg, Brussels and Luxembourg as well as on session-related travel and transport, to present the current results of reducing Parliament’s carbon footprint and to illustrate the beneficial impact on the environment as a result of these investments, and indeed any savings achieved in the longer term;

35.

Expresses support for the pursuit of measures to further reduce Parliament’s carbon footprint. Welcomes in this regards the studies underway on energy-saving-related aspects of buildings and ways to implement carbon-offsetting schemes for travel; furthermore supports incentives to use public transport instead of cars and the availability of more bicycles in Strasbourg;

36.

Notes that the budget item for Members’ travel costs is actually higher than the one for salaries; underlines the need for responsible use of allowances, notably travel allowances, and points out that without changing the current rules and by using, where possible, other means of transport than business class air travel from and to Parliament’s places of work, Parliament’s carbon footprint can be reduced and costs saved at the same time; calls on the Bureau to present, as agreed during the last pre-conciliation, in time for Parliament’s first reading, a study focused on the functioning of the new system and possible solutions for savings to be carried out;

37.

Recalls that the budgets of the European institutions were given earmarked money by the budgetary authority in order to finance a public transport subsidy for staff, as an environmental measure, following an initiative from Mr. Barroso; asks for an update on the situation as regards the Parliament;

38.

Asks that, where possible and appropriate, environmental statements be added to the financial statements used within the institution;

39.

Believes that public procurement directives need to be better adapted to facilitate, where possible and appropriate, the inclusion of environmental and social clauses;

40.

Welcomes the agreement for an increase of EUR 2,6 million in order to finance 110 annual visitors that Members can invite instead of the current 100; takes the view that it may be appropriate to have some time to evaluate the functioning of the new visitors’ centre before considering any further increase; the services responsible for the organisation of the visits should also take into account that Members may wish to split the visitor groups into different sizes over the year;

41.

Approves the EUR 3 million budgeted in relation to the opening of the visitors’ centre and the operating costs for a standard full year; points out the need to evaluate the initial year also from a financial point of view, including these running costs;

42.

Takes note of the Bureau’s decision to introduce allowances for office holders with a budgetary impact of EUR 400 000; notes, however, that the discussion on the principle was controversial; in this regard welcomes the fact that supporting documents have to be provided in order to be reimbursed for extra costs incurred in the performance of their duties;

43.

Takes note of the Bureau’s proposal to enter EUR 2,5 million for the House of European History, concerning studies following the results of the architect’s competition currently under evaluation; recalls its request from last year to receive a clear overview of the costs envisaged for the project as a whole, including administrative costs, at the latest at the stage of the Preliminary draft estimates for the 2011 budget procedure; also recalls the agreement with the Bureau from the pre-conciliation meeting in 2009; highlights that the report of the Committee of experts to the House of European History lists 11 points, which entail further costs: (1) ‘academic advisor composed of experts and museum specialists’, (2) ‘institutional independence of the institution’, (3) ‘extensive museum-pedagogic offers’, (3) ‘meeting place for young academics’, (5) ‘permanent evaluation’, (6) ‘temporary exhibit and travelling exhibition’, (7) ‘relevant events with a European reference’, (8) ‘own publications’, (9) ‘extensive on-line offers’, (10) ‘Creation of an own museums collection’, (11) ‘continuous development of exhibitions and the infrastructure of the museum’; therefore stresses that the global cost of this project must be identified as a matter of urgency;

44.

Warmly welcomes the inclusion of an initial analysis identifying fixed and variable costs in the budget proposal; recognises the methodological difficulties involved but is convinced that these concepts should be examined further; in this regard, recalls that it is awaiting a reply from the competent bodies as to how the concept of a zero-based budget policy, utilising this distinction between fixed and variable costs, could be applied in the context of the Parliament’s budget procedure; requests deeper examination regarding fixed costs, distinguishing permanent fixed costs, fixed costs for fixed terms and areas where savings could be generated; requests deeper examination regarding variable costs, making a clear link between costs and objectives, policies and actions, and identifying and sorting priorities by importance;

45.

Points out that the thresholds for the different public procurement procedures are currently stricter for the European institutions than those stipulated in the relevant European public procurement directives and that this situation leads to additional administrative costs and use of human resources that could be saved by better aligning the thresholds;

46.

Supports activities that have a social, cultural or linguistic dimension, for staff and their families, but disapproves of individual subsidies given in that context and consequently modifies the remarks to the relevant budget item;

47.

Strongly supports further efforts to make the institution better suited for disabled persons, both as regards the necessary changes to infrastructure and staff measures;

48.

Underlines that a more detailed examination of individual budget items, including an analysis of implementation rates, should take place before the vote on the draft budget in the autumn; will thus examine and take the final budgetary decisions at that time;

49.

Adopts the estimates for the financial year 2011 and recalls that the adoption of Parliament’s position on the Draft budget, as modified by the Council, will take place in October 2010, according to the voting procedure laid down by the Treaty;

50.

Approves the joint conclusions of the budgetary trilogue of 25 March 2010 annexed hereto;

51.

Instructs its President to forward this resolution and the estimates to the Council and the Commission.