Traduction de «Répartition du financement de l'Union européenne » (Français → Anglais) :

Recognises the critical contribution of the African Peace Facility in developing the triangular partnership between the UN, the EU and the AU; believes that this Facility provides both an entry point and a potential lever for creating a stronger partnership between the EU and the AU and has proved indispensable in allowing the AU, and through it the eight Regional Economic Communities (RECs), to plan and manage their operations; considers it vital that the EU institutions and Member States remain closely engaged if the Facility is to be fully utilised and that the AU demonstrate higher levels of efficiency and transparency in using the funds; takes the view that the APF should focus on structural support rather than just bankrolling Afri ...[+++]can forces’ pay; acknowledges that there are other funding mechanisms in use, but believes that given the Facility’s sole focus on Africa, as well as its clear goals, it is especially important with regard to PSOs in Africa; considers that Civil Society Organisations (CSOs) working on peace-building in Africa should be given the opportunity to contribute their views, as part of a more strategic engagement with CSOs on peace and security; remains concerned at the continuing problems of financing and political will on the part of African countries; notes the Council conclusions of 24 September 2012 which state that ‘funding, alternative to the funding from the EDF, will have to be considered’.

In its conclusions of 8 March 2012, the Council stated that any further steps on the voluntary relocation within the EU of beneficiaries of international protection should be examined and taken in light of the lessons learnt, and invited the Commission to undertake a full evaluation of the Pilot Project for intra-EU Relocation from Malta (EUREMA).

4. Calls on the Commission – in order to strengthen the independence, integrity and effectiveness of the European Supervisory Authorities – to initiate a dialogue on changing their funding so that the share covered by the EU budget is, as a first step, increased from 40% to 60%; underlines that the option of partly financing their activities via fees paid by market actors should be given more attention; stresses that, as soon as the authorities are running at full speed, the issue of whether ...[+++] they are sufficiently staffed to safeguard stability and ensure coherent implementation of regulatory reform should be thoroughly dealt with;

On the other hand, a vast majority of those national colleagues who expressed themselves were quite open to discuss the possibility of using a part of an existing tax to finance the European Union, even freely pondering on "suitable" candidate taxes .

If we are happy to leave it to the courts to decide policy and spending priorities, the European Union need do nothing, except to prepare to pay heavy and unpredictable bills, whenever patient probing and legal opinions are delivered.

Furthermore, as regards the institutions and the allocation of powers, the EU has exclusive competence in the area of competition law and monetary union; otherwise, the Member States must cope and must compete with one another.