<<
>>

3. Citizenship, space of freedom, safety and justice


The financing article includes two basic directions: creation of space the arches, safety and justice (53 % of financing) and citizenship (47 % of financing).
In total for realisation of the indicated purposes in 2010 it is allocated 1,4 mlrd euro, or 1,1 % from the general size of the budget of the Union.

The policy of creation of space the arches, safety and justice includes financing of following spheres: Management of migratory streams; Safety and protection of freedom; The fundamental rights and justice.
The policy of citizenship has an extensive line of business and consists in realisation of following programs: youth developments «Youth in operation», «Media 2007», «Culture 2007», «Inhabitants for Europe», public health and protection of consumers, and also in realisation of combined actions on communications.
Thus, directions of financing from budget of the Union on section "Citizenship" are provided by financing of a cultural, youth policy, a policy of protection of consumers and health of citizens, is equal as development of communications and media space development. On realisation of the indicated purposes in 2010 it is provided 0,66 mlrd euro.
4. EU as the global partner, including application of following tools of foreign policy: the help to developing countries, cooperation with other states, prevention of conflicts, foreign trade activities, expenses for expansion of the Union and the European policy of interaction with the countries-neighbours, rendering of the humanitarian help and support to the third countries concerning observance of human rights and democratisation.
The budget on realisation of foreign policy of the European Union for 2007 - makes 2013 an order 55 mlrd euro, or 5,6 % from the general budget.
It is important to notice, that within the limits of the given direction of financing from budget of the European Union costs for realisation of a policy of good neighbourhood and cooperation of EU with the Russian Federation are provided. So, in 2010 Union expenditures on public account have made 1,384 billion euro (or 19 % of costs of the European Union on the international activity) and have been directed on financing of programs on support of national minorities in Russia (culture development, mass-media and civil company), to prevention of pollution and improvement of ecology of Baltic sea, cooperation with countries of Eastern Europe and the Mediterranean, to assistance to peace development of Palestin. Administrative expenses (2,8 % of means of the general budget of EU). Compensatory costs (less than 1 % of the budget of the Union). Such distribution of means of the budget of the Union was not always. In the appendix № 18 to the dissertation change of structure of an expenditure of budgetary funds of EU since 1988 is displayed. For this time there was a reduction of financing of agriculture (from 58,1 % of the budget in 1988 to 41 % of the budget in 2011) and financing of a structural policy (from 21,7 % of the budget in 1988 to 46 % of the budget in 2011) is increased.
Thus, having studied system of formation of an account part of the budget of the Union, it is necessary to notice, that on kommunitarnom level costs for development of regions and agriculture, while financing of other public sectors of economy, such as formation, financing of research activity and other, obviously insufficiently, therefore is conducted by member countries of the European Union on bolshej to a measure independently are financed mainly.

In the appendix № 19 dissertations are carried out the analysis of distribution of financing of public sectors of economy between the European Union and EU member states. So, if from EU budget 71,8 % of costs for agriculture, on formation — only 0,1 % of requirement, researches and development - 6,3 % of requirement, rendering assistance to public sector - 14,3 % of requirement are covered.
To explain similar distribution of means of the budget difficult enough. In the foreign literature it is possible to track three directions of the researches directed on an explanation of distribution of means of the budget of EU.
The first direction - the theory of distribution of means of the budget of the Union depending on economic requirements. According to European Union agreements, EU budgetary funds are distributed in regions and the countries which require attraction of additional budgetary funds.
The second theory - the theory of national expenses/benefits where the role of the uniform market of EU in the course of distribution of budgetary funds is underlined. With introduction of the uniform market one countries have won, others, on the contrary, have lost. From this point of view, the budget represents the means allocated as a result of the interstate bargain: to the countries which have lost from introduction of the uniform market and liberalisation politicians, should compensate losses by means of means of the budget of the Union. As the professor of the London school of economic and political sciences S.Hiks wrote, EU budget represents game in which «each state introduces a payment to (receives from) the budget (the European Union so much, how many they acquire (lose) from the off-budget policy of EU (for example, the uniform market)» [85]. The given theory leads to the assumption, that the countries focused for export, are "donors" of the budget while recipients of budgetary funds are the states in which production is mainly focused on the national market. However to calculate influence of economic benefits of introduction of the uniform market for redistribution of budgetary resources of EU it is problematic enough. In research of the Helsinki university [86] the conclusion is done, that empirical data do not confirm the given position.
The third theory - the theory of "an exchange of voices» which is based on "trade" in voices of EU member states. According to the given theory, in the presence of incentive stimulus participants of the Union can vote, being guided by not national interests, and for the sake of achievement of any purpose. Also in a case if the order of business does not infringe on interests of the country And, the participant can "sell" the voice in favour of the country instead of the future support by the country of the country And in case of need. With reference to budgetary procedure of EU, the theory of "an exchange of voices» can take place in Advice where to each state the certain quantity of voices is taken away. Distribution of voices in Advice plays advantage of the states, small on the size: the smallest on territory EU state - Luxembourg — has two voices in Advice, while Germany - the largest country of the Eurozone - ten. It means, that to Luxembourg it is necessary an order of 4,5 voices on each one million inhabitants, and in Germany — 0,1 voices [87]. In this case, according to opinion of American scientist Dzh. Rodin, the small states can "sell" the voice instead of granting of other benefits [88]. From the given theory it is possible to draw a conclusion, that the small European Union countries on the size acquire from budgetary transfer deeds, than larger countries more.
Having considered all three theories, it is difficult enough to draw a conclusion, according to what theory there is a redistribution of means in the Union. Dogovory EU fix positions of the first theory though in practice the theory of "an exchange of voices», also influences.
From the theoretical point of view also it is difficult enough to explain similar distribution of budgetary funds of EU. For question studying it is reversible to theories of economic growth [89]. In the given work not to be put the research objective of all literature devoted to economic growth, but, nevertheless, there is a necessity to be defined with its basic conclusions.
In most general view, in models endogennogo economic growth the conclusion is done, that the policy in the field of granting of the grants, directed on support of investments, leads to increase in economic growth (for example, the Bar and Fat-and-martin). More the high level of social return can be result of outer effects.
Accumulation of knowledge can benefit not only to the separate person, but also company as a whole. Innovations can become a basis for the further innovations, ' therefore the first person who has invented innovative technology, cannot evaluate all its results to the full. Under these circumstances, the social effect can be more private.
Endogennaja the theory of economic growth assumes the active
The state interventions with the purposes of influence on economic growth.
For example, in the Ak-models developed by S.Rebelo [90], P.Romerom [91]
And R.Lukasom [92], is done a conclusion, that the company not internaliziruet
That effect which is brought by the investments enclosed by it into development
Nation-wide economy. Besides, according to R.Lukasa,
«The human capital is the engine of economic growth» [93].
Thereupon the role of a budgetary policy consists in subsidising
Investments with the purposes of contribution to growth of well-being of company and growth
Economy. Thus in models it is not indicated, what sort should be
State interference: are not indicated spheres of economy, which
It is necessary to support, types of investments, «the national state
1
Should be absolutely independent in acceptance of similar decisions ».
The second type of models endogennogo economic growth (F.Agijon [94] and P.Houvitt [95]) is under construction on belief, that technological progress is accompanied by increase in quantity of types of the goods and creation of new types of the goods more a choice quality. The given direction has been named "shumpeterianskim" as ideas have been put in its basis
J.Shumpetera about «creative destruction». So, new-innovation does become outdated all previous workings out, and technologies, ' thanking: to that the competitiveness between the innovative companies stimulates technological progress which, in turn, leads to economic growth. The innovative company can support monopoly in production of a certain kind of the goods or services only until it will not be replaced by the new innovative company.
R.Lukas was the supporter of construction of multi-grocery models in which the goods are made by means of different technologies by the i-workers having various level of skills, in the environment where innovations are constantly introduced, mobility of a labour grows, - most likely, economic growth in this case will increase.
Because of existence of set of versions endogennyh theories of economic growth it is difficult enough to introduce any general conclusions which could be applied to the budgetary policy of EU. The unique conclusion which can be made, consists that it is desirable to stimulate industrial activity or investments into spheres in which the social effect will be above private.
At least, it means, that grants for research activity should be directed to those areas where will be bolshy an outer effect from increase in knowledge. Meanwhile, the success of planning depends on that, how much complete information the government has. Sometimes the best alternative begins to allow «to the market to decide most» and to conduct no-purpose subsidising. But technical progress is necessary for operating, differently it can become destructive for the state. So, not always it is useful to subsidise only research activity which "is torn off" from production, it is better to put up in money in applied industrial researches.
The requirement for increase in financing of research activity on kommunitarnom level is justified. It is necessary for Europe more means for opening of the research centres, development of networks of interaction between various fields of knowledge for increase in mobility of scientists. The given purpose is proclaimed in the Lisbon agreement where it is told about necessity of creation for Europe of "company of knowledge».
Thus, according to our opinion, on kommunitarnyj level it is necessary to transmit those spheres of public consumption which will function more effectively if financing occurs at Union level, instead of EU member states independently (first of all it is a question of economy from scale, decrease in outer effects).
Thus, it is possible to draw a conclusion, that from the theoretical point of view redistribution of means of the budget of the Union is inexpedient and is not effective. As the proof disputes on an inefficiency of the organisation and use of the budget of EU can serve in business and scientific circles to that. One researchers [96] insist, that is necessary to concentrate on true redistribution of means first of all.
Others speak about necessity of creation of the budgetary government within the limits of the European Union. So, for example, in Report Sapira [97] presented in 2003, the item is defended, that within the limits of the European Union it is necessary to create the new government on budgetary questions, and to allocate with its sufficient resources for development of a trans-European infrastructure and financing of research activity.
In research of the Eurobarometer of 2008 it was found out, that inhabitants of EU believe, that the majority of means of the budget of the European Union is spent for administrative expenses (26 % of respondents that means, that in the European consciousness administrative expenses are obviously overestimated), costs for the agricultural policy (24 % of respondents) and «on economic growth» (24 % of respondents). Thus on a question, in what spheres it is necessary to direct financing from the allied budget, more voices it is given for financing of the lines of business directed on «economic growth» (38 % of respondents), on employment of the population and the decision of social problems (36 % of respondents), and also on population health (32 % of respondents).
So, today the European Union budget represents the tool of redistribution of means of EU member states for the purpose of achievement kommunitarnyh the purposes of the European Union.
On kommunitarnom level there is a financing mainly those political spheres which are directed on internally development of association (a sustainable development and economic growth, agriculture and development of agricultural regions, citizenship, freedom, safety and justice) while financing of foreign policy of EU is rather limited. It becomes especially important with realisation after coming into force of the Lisbon agreement of the general foreign policy of member countries of the European Union, and also with necessity of introduction of new posts of the president of the European advice and the Supreme representative of the European Union on foreign policy. Additional resources for financing of external activity of the European Union on what we will concentrate attention in the following paragraph of dissertational research as soon as possible be required to the European Union.
<< | >>
A source: GILYOVA ANNA ALEKSANDROVNA. Formation and use of the general budget of the European Union. The dissertation on competition of a scientific degree of a Cand.Econ.Sci. Moscow -. 2011

More on topic 3. Citizenship, space of freedom, safety and justice:

  1. a legal status of Jews on the eve of their introduction into the Russian citizenship and a condition of their acceptance in the Russian citizenship
  2. CHAPTER 1. INTERNATIONAL LEGAL BASES OF INTERACTION OF COURTS OF JUSTICE ON THE EUROPEAN SPACE
  3. § 2. Maintenance of ecological safety and the international space law
  4. IV. Safety of the rights and freedom of citizens 28.
  5. legislation harmonisation as the factor promoting interaction of courts of justice on the European space
  6. § 2.2"Space» justice and the terrestrial power in the first philosophical experiences: Geraklit
  7. §1. The legal factors promoting an establishment of interaction of courts of justice on the European space
  8. a substantiation of necessity of creation of the international organisation in sphere of maintenance of safety of space navigation
  9. § 1. Restrictions of a freedom of speech on the Internet with a view of protection of the constitutional system, defence of the country and safety of the state
  10. § 3.2. Value of Supervising principles of maintenance of long-term stability of space activity for perfection of the international space law
  11. Actual problems of delimitation of space and air space
  12. § 2.1. Problems of regulation of applied kinds of space activity and certification of nuclear energy sources of space objects
  13. 2. Kriminologichesky safety in public safety system. Objects kriminologicheskoj safety.
  14. GURBANOV RAMIN AFAD OGLY. INTERACTION of courts of justice ON the EUROPEAN SPACE: THEORY And PRACTICE QUESTIONS. The dissertation on competition of a scientific degree of the doctor of juridical science. Baku -, 2015 2015
  15. the European Space Agency as model of collective cooperation for OIS in research and space use.
  16. 1.3. Conditions of acceptance of Jews in the Russian citizenship in 1772.
  17. Chapter 2. Space activity and application of principles of the international space law by twelve member states OIS