Abstract
The evolution of the budgetary procedure, with the new financial regulation of 2002, has increased the responsibility of the different actors and clarified the different management methods, increasing the transparency of the whole procedure. Those changes allow us to wonder if there is, today, a right balance between responsibility for budget implementation and political accountability for the Union budget's use. Since those two levels of responsibilities – responsibility for budget implementation and political responsibility for the budget's use - imply different actors, assessing the balance between those responsibilities means assessing the part played by those actors in the budgetary procedure. In order to achieve this assessment, we need to take into account both meanings of the concept of “responsibility”. The first meaning is linked to the notions of power and competence: being responsible means being in charge of something, being competent within a specific field of action – and sometimes being compelled to do something because no one else is able to do it. The second meaning is more political: it means that we, as a political organization, are submitted to an external judgment that can lead to sanctions, such as the obligation of resigning: this is the main criterion of a democracy.
