Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-10-04-Speech-3-235"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20001004.10.3-235"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mrs Plooij van Gorsel, thank you for your intervention. I am aware of the significant support that your report gives to the European Research Area. I feel that we must take into due consideration the fact that our objective is not part of a traditional framework programme. You, who have experience, will perhaps say that this has already been stated several times.
I feel that what is currently required is something that structures the European Research Area, which is to say something that goes beyond the framework programme and supplements national programmes; we need a structuring element, which means that we have to agree on
certain rules. And here I am referring to the flip side of variable geometry. Yes, with an opening-up of the national programmes of several Member States onto an area with European added value, the Commission and the Union can intervene. But they must intervene by applying criteria that facilitate access which is as broad as possible for all the elements of the European Union, which is to say for all the Member States, and even for third countries too.
There are new proposals to champion. We have never made use of Article 169 of the Treaty; this Article could be used to harness more frequently and more cohesively the activities of the various Member States.
I share your views on multidisciplinarity. This issue is certainly not developed particularly extensively, but it is nevertheless brought to light in the criteria. The third paragraph of page 9 of the document reads as follows: “need to combine complementary expertise in the different countries, particularly in the case of interdisciplinary issues, and to carry out comparative studies on a European scale”.
It is clear that in the future – and you have stressed this in your report – development will take place on the borderlines between different technologies and sciences such as biology and information technology. It is therefore clear that the multidisciplinary aspect must be taken into consideration, and will moreover constitute one of the elements of European added value.
Concerning the question about the European Union and its disinterested approach to basic research, I do not feel that this is the case. I moreover believe that this dichotomy between basic research and applied research is a thing of the past. In many fields, it is immediately apparent that certain basic research elements are, in fact, applied research elements. The current framework programmes are therefore a mixture of basic research issues and applied research issues. So I do not feel that there is any need to make a distinction. This is my belief, and also that of the scientific community, which does not seem to be of the opinion that that European Union programmes systematically disregard basic research. I believe that we will have the opportunity, Mr Papayannakis, to address this issue again in our discussions, but there is no intention on our part to make a distinction. Moreover, no one is talking about making a distinction, and industry has not called for one.
Lastly, I would like to reply to Mr Piétrasanta, who I thank for his intervention and constructive intent. As concerns discussions with the STOA Unit, I feel that we have to act together, since this is something that concerns this House, the Joint Research Centre and the technological foresight institutes in the various Member States. It is in our own interests to cooperate more effectively and more closely. I would therefore welcome any form of debate or discussion on this issue.
As concerns the Euro-Mediterranean context more specifically, I believe that you too will have noted the interest shown by the countries on both sides of the Mediterranean in conducting joint research and technological development activities. I would, however, like to say before Parliament that it is important for this need, which has been expressed and which is, moreover, a force for economic development and innovation in this area, to be considered at the level of the MEDA programmes and at that of all the external relations programmes.
There is often a tendency, at external relations level, not to view research and technological development as priorities. I, for my part, believe that these are key factors for increasing understanding among researchers and their mobility around the Mediterranean basin. In any case, these were the conclusions that the Ministers for Research and Science reached on this subject at Capri last weekend."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples