PROGRAMMA OF ACTIVITIES FOR 1979 OF THE COMMISSION UNDER THE PRESIDENCY OF ROY JENKINS

by Altiero Spinelli

SUMMARY: The European Parliament discusses the Commission's programme under the presidency of Roy Jenkins, for 1979. Jenkins's report and Spinelli's intervention relate in particular to the problems associated with the creation of the EMS, which was given final approval by European Council in Dublin in December 1978 and is expected to come into operation in March 1979.

Mention should be made of Spinelli's address to the Camera dei Deputati concerning Italy's membership of the EMS (12 December 1978), now published in "La mia battaglia per un'Europa diversa" (Lacaita 1979). "Speeches in European Parliament, 1976-1986", Pier Virgilio Dastoli Editor. (EP, 13 February 1979)

Mr President, on behalf of the majority of the Communist and Allies Group, I would be tempted to deal one by one with all the various important problems raised by President Jenkins, this has already been done to a large extent and I shall not, therefore go over the same ground again. One point that I would very much like to have discussed concerns the prospect of economic recovery, on which all partial measures must be based, but we dealt with this very fully last which all partial measures must be based, b

year and I would simply have had to repeat exactly what I said on that occasion; because so far nothing has been done in that direction by the Commission or by the individual States.

I shall therefore concentrate on a point we feel to be crucial and on which I have observed a strange reticence - or complete silence - on the part of Mr Jenkins. I shall dwell on two or three questions, earnestly begging Mr Jenkins to give us a full answer and not just a summary or elusive reply.

The way in which the European Monetary System has started off or rather, the way in which it has not started off _ fully confirms all the subject should have been studied in greater depth and the EMS given structures much more of the Community type. This point was made in this House by Mr Amendola, not with us today, who pointed out that it would be wrong to ignore all the economic policy aspects associated with monetary policy and without which it is difficult to set in motion a process of monetary unifications - and, precisely at the moment at which the EMS was supposed to start operating, major problems arose.

You have referred, Mr Jenkins, to the problem of the compensatory amounts which is, indeed, a major problem that is causing serious distortions on the market and needs to be tackled. We regret that no heed has been paid to this Parliament which has already asked the Council and the Commission in the budget debates for two successive years to tackle this problem. And the government that has raised the question today helped, by the stand it took, to have this point removed from the budget. Perhaps if it had not taken the position it has today it might be somewhat more strongly placed, because it would have had the support of Community legality on its side.

But the problem of the compensatory amounts - which is being tackled in order to make it possible to put the monetary system into effect - is only one of the problems on which the system could come to grief because there is another. Just as the first problem caused a crisis in the Council, the second is also causing a major crisis in the Council, and also in relations between Council, Parliament and Commission. I am talking about the policies of solidarity and the transfer of resources to which not only the European Council but also that other political organ of the Community, this Parliament, have given their attention. The latter, not through demagogy but because it realized that the decision to set up a European Monetary System necessarily implied strengthened transfer policies towards the regions and countries in the greatest d' culty, increased the Regional Fund with a measure of agreement rarely attained in this House. Well now, since that decision, since the approval of that budget, three governments

- after the first month when a transitional situation was still permitted - have continued to pay the provisional twelfths. We would like to know what the Commission intends to do about this problem which has tremendous importance for the operation of the Commission in 1979. I know very well that the procedure for infringements has its own pace and that the case is not taken immediately to Court but contact is first made with the offender, but I also know very well that much depends on the zeal of the Commission, which may act promptly or take its time. Now, because it is crucial - for the Commission and for the individual States - to know whether the Regional Fund is available for action or whether for the time being the necessary figure is not reached because the monthly contributions that should be paid have not come in, I would like to know whether the Commission intends to take swift action to ensure that the budget approved by the Parliament is complied with, because the success of this policy, among o

ther things, depends on it.

There is a second problem connected with this one. You referred, Mr President, to the next supplementary budget whose purpose is to add the 250 million u.a. for the allowances proposed by the Eropean Council on the occasion of the launching of the EMS. Well now, since rumours are circulating on all sides - and not only rumours - we would like to know the intentions of the Commission in this connection. I must confess that I expected some reference to this in the President's speech. What are the Commission's intentions? Parliament has underlined the importance it attached to its decision on the Regional Fund, foregoing all the other things, although it considered them to be necessary, in order that this item be upheld.

Does the Commission intend - as I personally feel to be necessary - to add a supplementary balance of 250 million u.a. to the budget approved by Parliament in order to carry out the task assumed by the Member States of giving special assistance to two countries which are in difficulties, or does it propose to withdraw this amount from the Regional Fund, change its name and regard it as a EMS allowance? This would imply changing the allocation approved by Parliament and would withdraw from the British, French and other what is their due, to give it to only two countries in view of the fact that the new chapter concerns only two countries.

Mr President, I feel that today you ought to give us an answer that will dispel our concern, but I cannot fail to draw your attention to the fact that an unsatisfactory attitude on the part of the Commission towards the problem of the regular inflow of income and that of the next supplementary budget for EMS allowances could cause very serious consequences firstly in this Parliament and then in the Council and in the mood of the various Member States of the Community which would not, perhaps, be the best way to tackle the Community's problems in 1979 and to prepare ourselves for the elections to the European Parliament.

On these two questions, Mr Jenkins, we would like to have a clear and precise reply - 'klipp und klar' as the Germans say.