Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-09-01-Speech-1-075"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20030901.5.1-075"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, thank you all of you for your attention and for being here today and, to those who took the floor, for their questions and observations. I should like to say in particular to Mr Lage and his fellow Portuguese Members that I was very touched by their words of thanks. Nevertheless, I feel that I was only doing my job, as were Mrs Diamantopoulou and Mr Vitorino when they also visited Portugal to express European solidarity by offering words and compassion, but also through tangible action, even though I understand that this can sometimes seem insufficient. In any case, I should like to thank you for your comments.
On the subject of prevention, a number of you obviously mentioned the best prevention method, which is of course to keep men and women in the areas concerned to live and work there. Mrs Grossetête spoke about desertification, as did Mr Vallvé, Mr Fiori, Mr Maat and Mr Figueiredo. Now is not the time to mention the different aspects of the common agricultural policy, but whatever its imperfections and shortcomings and leaving aside the new course set by the CAP – and I have said myself that it would be better for doing what Mr Fischler in any case proposes and taking environmental requirements into account – it has to be said quite frankly that if the common agricultural policy had not existed, it would have spelt the end for many regions where there are still farmers today. I would add that if we wish to maintain these activities, not only agriculture or forestry, but activities in rural areas where desertification is a real risk, we also need a regional support policy. And this mitigates in favour of the idea, even if it needs to evolve further, of a new regional policy which is of interest to all the regions of Europe.
Mrs Roth-Behrendt and Mr Moreira Da Silva mentioned, as many of you did, the great international issue of Kyoto, the greenhouse effect and global warming. I myself have said what I think on this subject. Chance has nothing to do with it. If we experience increasingly violent storms, if temperatures continue to rise, if global warming causes the increase in temperatures and if, all of a sudden, there are fires, floods and – as we will probably see over the next few weeks – further disasters due to rain, storms and erosion, it is no coincidence. I therefore believe that the European Union has a joint, Community-wide responsibility to apply the Kyoto Protocol to the letter, as I said earlier, and to persuade as many countries as possible, including Russia, to ratify this protocol, which seeks to organise prevention at global level. Over and above the efforts that we need to make to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, there are clearly all of our other policies which, as I see it – I am saying this to Mr Turmes because I agree with him – need to be implemented with this in mind. This applies too to the policies that we support through the Structural Funds or the funds for transport. Personally I am anxious for us to tip the balance of European transport policy more towards rail. Moreover, I would remind you that under the Cohesion Fund, for which I am responsible, half of the appropriations are allocated to the environment and the other half to transport.
In this context I am going to pay close attention to the new countries that are entering the Union, Mr Turmes, because we have to avoid these countries, where reconstruction is in full swing, making the same mistakes that we have made on transport since the war: erecting high-voltage power lines in any old place, constructing roads in the middle of cities, building mainly roads and motorways, with more and more concrete, rather than developing rail transport. I promise you that in the new Cohesion Fund we are going to ensure that we strike a better balance. You forgot one subject, Mr Turmes, that is also a particular concern of mine, and that is urban public transport. Through the Cohesion Fund we are going to help cities, Warsaw and others, to provide this public transport. I would like these cities to make more space for urban public transport and to give it better support. I would repeat that in the future regional policy, which I am reflecting on at the moment, my intention is to make this kind of risk prevention compulsory in all of the European regions that are in receipt of aid.
Mrs Ainardi and Mrs Keppelhoff-Wiechert mentioned the common agricultural policy in connection with the drought and I would also repeat that, as Mr Fischler has demonstrated, we will show a great deal of flexibility under the CAP so as to help farmers that are very seriously affected at the present time, working alongside and in addition to national governments.
Mrs Ries mentioned education. Time does not allow me to go into detail now, but I think that where the environment is concerned one form of prevention is to explain properly what is at stake and to educate people, so as to limit as far as possible not only deliberate or criminal acts but also acts of carelessness.
I should like to support Mr Berthu, who mentioned the need to develop the research programme. My colleague, Mr Busquin, also intends to increase the research effort in this field, as it is insufficient in Europe. As Mr Colom i Naval said, the research effort is all the more necessary where this heatwave and global warming are concerned in the light of the fact that the last decade, from 1990 to 2000, has seen the hottest years for a thousand years. It is therefore necessary to increase our understanding of these phenomena so as to combat them as effectively as possible.
I have responded to Mr Fiori's comments on drought. He invited the Commission to consider the issue of coordinating water resources. That is fine by me. The problem is that responsibility for planning and water resources does not lie entirely at Community level, but is shared with national and regional bodies.
Finally, Mr Lipietz suggested a Green Paper on protecting the older generation from climate-related accidents. I think this is an interesting idea, at least to see what has happened in all of the countries and perhaps gain a kind of overview of this crisis, of the way in which different countries responded to it, and so as to exchange good practice. I will pass on this suggestion to my colleague David Byrne. I would say to Mr Turmes that the letter that he mentioned, which was sent to Mr Prodi, will be scrutinised very carefully, not only by the President of the Commission but also by all of the commissioners who are interested in this subject and in particular by the one who has just addressed you.
Mr Coelho mentioned the speed of payment. Last Wednesday, at the same time as I proposed these 31.6 million, Mrs Schreyer proposed the procedure necessary for the two arms of the budgetary authority, the European Parliament and the Council, to be able to make a decision very quickly, no doubt before the end of this month, so that the money is actually paid, in full, to Portugal in October. It will therefore be usable from October.
On Thursday I met the Portuguese Finance Minister, who is making preparations to distribute this money to support or reimburse emergency expenditure. Once again, I too was very struck by the solidarity, generosity and proactive response of the people of Portugal, but also of the inhabitants of other regions, other countries and, as Mr Coelho said, not only countries in the European Union. Switzerland was mentioned. Morocco has also contributed to the relief effort. I think this is excellent and it needed to be pointed out.
Like many of you, Mr Figueiredo and Mrs Ferrer mentioned the restoration of the forests, which will take time. It will take more time where cork oaks are concerned – 40 years – than for fir trees. It is very striking when you fly over the scorched bare earth to see the number of forest roads. You can clearly see that this was a site of genuine economic activity with people who lived from forestry development. During the time that reforestation takes, these people need to live and must not be forced to leave. Jobs will therefore have to be created, no doubt in other sectors, so that the people are not tempted to leave. In any case, I can confirm that it will be possible to use the Structural Funds and redeploy them to this end.
Several of you, including Mrs Redondo Jiménez, Mr Martin, Mrs Ferrer, Mr Savary and Mr Vallvé, made rather forcible comments about prevention and protection measures and expressed regret for the amendments proposed by the Commission in 'Forest Focus'. I should like to avoid controversy and especially misunderstandings and remind you or tell you very strongly that the necessary protection and prevention measures are still and will continue to be funded under the rural development programmes. The new 'Forest Focus' Regulation is to be seen as complementing and supplementing these. What the Commission has sought to do, even though there has clearly been a misunderstanding, is to avoid overlaps or redundancies between the regulations. Mrs Wallström, I might add, will be meeting the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy very soon and will explain this to them.
I also wish to say – Messrs Rovsing and Hugues Martin mentioned this issue – that when we talk about reforestation, we may be referring to regions that have been ravaged by fires or to those that have been devastated by storms. I remember seeing parts of our region, Aquitaine, with thousands of hectares of trees blown down by the storms. Different reforestation methods therefore need to be adopted taking into account what has happened. I am thinking in particular, as you said, Mr Rovsing, of firebreak areas. Let me give you the following statistic: 10% of expenditure under rural development for the period 2000 to 2006 is going to forest-related measures and a large proportion of this money is devoted to afforestation. The money is, therefore, there. It is not the money that is lacking. We have the capacity to pay for all of these initiatives and I would repeat that where the structural funds are concerned, for which I have direct responsibility, or training under Mrs Diamantopoulou or rural development under Mr Fischler, we will be able to show a great deal of flexibility and accept all proposals to redeploy or reprogramme funds, as Portugal has by the way already proposed doing to the tune of EUR 182 million.
Mr Ribeiro e Castro, Mrs Bastos just a moment ago and Mr Cunha expressed regret that the figure was no higher than 31.6 million. I myself said the other day that this amount was undoubtedly not enough to meet existing needs. I would repeat that it is earmarked entirely for emergency measures, which would never have been supported were it not for the Solidarity Fund. If this catastrophe had happened in Portugal two years ago, the amount would not have been 31.6 million but zero. As Mr Savary reminded us just now, it was because the floods were so serious that we resurrected this Solidarity Fund, which had been abolished in the past. The old Fund consisted of just a few dozen million euro; we have recreated it with a billion euro, which does constitute real progress. Having said that, all I can do is apply the criteria that were approved by Parliament and the Council, while observing, I might add, that the criteria that I initially proposed were substantially different. We apply these criteria with the utmost impartiality and objectivity and it is the same criteria that are used for floods in Germany, Austria and the Czech Republic as for Portugal. I would say to Mrs Bastos that I do not consider these criteria to be definitively good or ideal. On the contrary, I see the Commission's role as being to carry out an evaluation, once the Fund has been up and running for two years, and probably to propose changes or modifications.
I would like to thank Mrs Ries for her comments on the issue of civil protection and I will pass on her group's support for this idea of a European civil protection force to Mrs Wallström.
I will say to Mr Mayol i Raynal, who is no longer present, that I was very interested in his idea, if I understood correctly, of a European cycle route. As it happens, I have a longstanding and keen interest in the provision of cycle tracks and I will tell Mrs de Palacio that the European Parliament is determined to see progress made here."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples