Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-03-14-Speech-2-319"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20000314.15.2-319"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"The question on how the Structural Funds respect our environmental legislation is a critical one and I appreciate the interest expressed in this matter by Mrs Jackson, Mr Poettering and Mrs Schnellhardt. We had a discussion on this subject in the Commission meeting today particularly as regards the link to the habitats and the birds directives. The main principle is clear: the actions cofinanced under the Structural Funds and the Cohesion Fund should contribute to the protection and improvement of the environment in the European Union. This is confirmed in the new regulatory framework for the Structural Funds and Cohesion Fund and in the Commission's related guidelines. We should remember that both the Cohesion Fund and the Structural Funds finance important investments into environmental infrastructure such as waste water treatment facilities or waste management systems.
Let me make one thing clear first to avoid misunderstandings. The general regulation on the Structural Funds states that ‘operations financed must be in conformity with the provisions of the Treaty, with instruments adopted under it and with Community policies and actions’. Contrary to the suggestion in one of the oral questions, this does not represent a new obligation on the Member States. In fact, it is based closely on the previous framework regulation on the Structural Funds for the programming period 1994-1999. The Structural Funds Regulation has been approved by the Member States and the Council.
With regard to protection of sites under the habitats and birds directives, it is important that we do not give money to measures which adversely affect sites deserving protection – paying out money with one hand and maybe fining a Member State with the other hand. This is what we confirmed in the Commission this afternoon, and Michel Barnier will set out our decisions in a letter to the Member States in a few days. In this regard, the Commission intends to use all the possibilities offered by the new regulatory framework for the Cohesion and Structural Funds.
In following up the letter sent to Member States by Commissioners Wulf-Mathies and Bjerregaard on June 23 1999, the Commission will insist that, in the programming documents for the period 2000-2006, there must be a firm and irrevocable commitment guaranteeing that the programmes are consistent with the protection of sites under Natura 2000. Member States will be required to notify sites if they have not already done so within an agreed timetable, and to guarantee formally that they will not undertake action leading to the deterioration of potential Natura 2000 sites. The Commission will then use all the means at its disposal to ensure that commitments entered into the programming documents are fully respected.
It intends to monitor the situation in the Member States, including the use of on-the-spot checks. The Commission's representative in the monitoring committee for each programme will also seek to ensure that Member States' obligations with regard to Natura 2000 are fully respected. In addition, should a Member State not honour its commitment to provide the lists under the habitats and birds directives within the timeframe set in the programming documents, the Commission will take immediate action. This includes in particular excepting specific situations and with respect to the principle of proportionality – possible recourse to the provisions of the Structural or Cohesion Fund regulations in relation to the suspension of payments. Of course, all this is in addition to the ongoing infringement procedures against a number of Member States for their failure to implement these directives.
In summing up, what we decided in Commission today is that we will insist that Member States send us their Natura 2000 lists: they should already have been sent, as has been stated many years ago. We will use the means at our disposal to ensure that they honour the commitments that they have entered into. Without the lists neither the Member States nor the Commission can ensure that we protect important nature sites when carrying out Structural Fund operations, for the simple reason that we do not know where these sites are.
One more word on the habitats directive. The Commission does not agree that there is a lack of clarity in this directive. The directive is intended to establish a frame of reference which, in accordance with the subsidiarity principle, leaves the detailed implementation to the Member States. While the Commission has no plans to revise the directive, its services are ready to provide guidance to the Member States on its implementation and we are finally starting to move on this. The only sites which the Commission takes into account under the habitats directive are those put forward by the authorities in the Member States. So-called shadow lists can only help in efforts to identify sites inside the Member States. At Community level, they can contribute to scientific reference material in the creation of inventories of natural habitats and existing species."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples