Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-09-19-Speech-3-079"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20010919.7.3-079"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Mr President, Commissioner, you will be aware that the Regional and Transport Committee has started its deliberations on social and economic cohesion via the second cohesion report and that this report launches the debate on how we face up to the challenges of regional funding and structural policy in an enlarged Europe. However, whilst I am grateful for the Commissioner's statement today, my group is still disappointed with the Commission as it appears that it has not used its right of initiative and has not engaged itself fully on this topic. It raises the question as to what the real proposals of the Commission are.
Commissioner Barnier referred to the meeting in May in which many Members participated, but again nothing concrete seems to have come out of that meeting. On our side of the political divide, we recognised at an early stage how sensitive this issue could be and indeed our experience of Agenda 2000 was the catalyst that told us this. But then Commissioner Wulf-Matthies facilitated a common position with Parliament and so we feel that the time is now right for us to start work with the Commission as it becomes more active, positive and decisive.
My group has discussed in detail the questions that you have posed. The main points emanating from our discussion revolve around the principle of keeping the concept of social and economic cohesion and its most representative instrument, namely the Cohesion Fund. But a thorough discussion is required on implementing the goals of the cohesion policy before we make any decisions on the future financing of structural aid.
At the moment, we are facing a number of great challenges and any discussion on the implementation of Cohesion Fund has to include other areas under the umbrella of sustainable development, such as employment and agriculture. We must continue to ensure that the poorer regions that presently receive structural aid are not mistreated in the future and that Community initiatives, such INTERREG and URBAN, are retained. We also question whether 1.27% of the Community GDP, as was decided on in Agenda 2000, is enough with regard to the new Cohesion Fund.
In launching this debate, it is our view that our discussions would have been more fruitful and more meaningful if the Commission had come forward with ideas of its own so that it could act as a facilitator of those discussions. We know that it is an important issue. At the moment, we are left with a series of questionnaires, but we can give the Commissioner a guarantee that our group will be fully involved in discussions in the coming months."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples