Madam Speaker, I am happy to join in the debate on the motion from the member for Abbotsford requesting a name change of the Huntingdon port of entry to the Abbotsford-Huntingdon port of entry.

51. Notes that, despite the timetable for the development and entry into operation of the Schengen Information System II (SIS II) being uncertain, it is proposed that CA decrease only slightly from EUR 35 million to EUR 30 million, while payment appropriations increase from EUR 19.5 million to EUR 21 million; recalls that the Commission had projected EUR 27.91 million until the entry into operation of SIS II in the fourth quarter of 2011; points out ...[+++]that the development of the SIS II is already behind schedule and will most likely not be completed by the end of 2011; considers it necessary, given that the prospect of a migration to SIS II is growing increasingly unlikely and a replacement option is currently being prepared, to place part of these funds in the reserve, pending further analysis;

51. Notes that, despite the timetable for the development and entry into operation of the Schengen Information System II (SIS II) being uncertain, it is proposed that CA decrease only slightly from EUR 35 million to EUR 30 million, while payment appropriations increase from EUR 19.5 million to EUR 21 million; recalls that the Commission had projected EUR 27.91 million until the entry into operation of SIS II in the fourth quarter of 2011; points out ...[+++]that the development of the SIS II is already behind schedule and will most likely not be completed by the end of 2011; considers it necessary, given that the prospect of a migration to SIS II is growing increasingly unlikely and a replacement option is currently being prepared, to place part of these funds in the reserve, pending further analysis;

51. Notes that, despite the timetable for the development and entry into operation of the Schengen Information System II (SIS II) being uncertain, it is proposed that CA decrease only slightly from EUR 35 million to EUR 30 million, while payment appropriations increase from EUR 19.5 million to EUR 21 million; recalls that the Commission had projected EUR 27.91 million until the entry into operation of SIS II in the fourth quarter of 2011; points out ...[+++]that the development of the SIS II is already behind schedule and will most likely not be completed by the end of 2011; considers it necessary, given that the prospect of a migration to SIS II is growing increasingly unlikely and a replacement option is currently being prepared, to place part of these funds in the reserve, pending further analysis;

18. Is convinced that the management method of the present-day Union, and the enlarged Union of tomorrow, must continue to rely on the principle of decentralisation; this demands comparable and equally efficient management capacity on the part of the various national administrations, as required by the new rules on the Structural Funds (Regulation (EC) No 1260/1999) launched in 2000, which also involve a clarification of the respective roles of the Commission, the Member States and the various partners referred in article 8 of the regulation; notes, however, when a budgetary action involves several Member States in several operations of the CAP, more intervention by the Commission may be required; insists that the success of the decentra ...[+++]lised management of Sapard and Ispa in the candidate countries and of the activity of their national administration will depend on the EU commitment to support these countries in improving their administrative capacity; encourages the Commission to continue its training efforts in the formation (via twinning with applicant countries) and information (such as round tables with the responsible bodies in the Member States);

The parties to the Common Table created two additional fora for their discussions which are guided by the Treaty Table and are titled the Fiscal Relations Table and the Governance Table.