Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-09-20-Speech-4-095"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20010920.9.4-095"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
The asymmetrical capitalist development which characterises the economies of the ΕU can be seen in the changes which have taken place over the last decade, during which asymmetries between the Member States, between the rich and less developed regions and even within Member States of the ΕU has worsened. Instead of convergence and cohesion, divergence is worsening, widening the gap between the rich and poor.
Even the report admits that the ΕU "still exhibits major regional asymmetries in economic and social development [and] regional asymmetries have actually increased within some Member States". The golden triangle formed by Yorkshire, Franche-Comté and Hamburg accounts for almost half (47%) the income but only one-seventh of the surface area and one-third of the population of the ΕU, while 18% of the population of the EU is living below the poverty line.
As a result of ‘labour mobility’ strategies, which strengthen migration towards and the concentration of wealth in the rich central regions of the Union, flexible forms of employment and unbridled privatisation within this triangle, all policies, both national and Community, come second to the law of maximum profit. Instead of creating jobs, we have mass redundancies and spiralling unemployment.
Even the report tells us that the ten poorest regions have an unemployment rate of 23%. In the countries which are the main beneficiaries of Structural Funds, that is, Italy, Spain and Greece, there was a clear increase in unemployment between 1988 and 1998, especially in Greece, where the official unemployment rate of 6.7% in 1988 compares with 11.7% in 1998, an increase of about 75%.
These structural interventions are not designed to bring about real development in each region which takes account of its unique features; on the contrary, they come second to even bigger profits for big business. Not only are funds for structural interventions both insufficient and limited, 30-40% of total funding received by the poorest Member States finds its way back to the richest Member States in the form of payment for know-how or capital equipment.
And this funding has been paid for by scrapping traditional productive sectors, changing crops, destroying agricultural produce and deserting areas.
The ones who suffer as a result are the poorest sections of society, while the ones who benefit are the monopoly behemoths and the various rodents which surround them, in that Community funds are the "pieces of silver" paid for integration into the ΕU; in a way they are a form of compensation to big business for doing away with much of the protectionism which it enjoys under a national market system."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples