Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-02-22-Speech-2-168"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2005-02-22"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Financing nature protection policy2
dcterms:Language	"de"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20050222.12.2-168"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2005-02-22-Speech-2-1692
lpv:speaker	lp:Karin Scheele2
lpv:spokenAs	substitute; DEVE (2004-07-21--2007-01-14)3 member; PES (2004-07-20--2008-12-10)3 substitute; Delegation to the EU-Kazakhstan, EU-Kyrgyzstan and EU-Uzbekistan Parliamentary Cooperation Committees, and for relations with Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Mongolia (2004-09-15--2008-12-10)3 member; Delegation to the ACP-EU Joint Parliamentary Assembly (2004-09-15--2008-12-10)3 member; ENVI (2004-07-21--2007-01-14)3 unknown; Sozialdemokratische Partei Österreichs (2004-07-20--2008-12-10)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, I should like to join previous speakers in congratulating the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety. I see this as a very important debate, and as one that shows that pressure must be brought to bear by this House to ensure that a separate instrument is created to finance Natura 2000. One of the previous speakers said that Natura 2000 is seen in some quarters as a programme for annoying the public. In a great many other quarters, however, it is viewed as providing real assistance in the struggle to protect biodiversity. I believe that it is our task to support those who view it in this way, and, in common with many of my fellow Members, I am therefore in favour of there being a separate financial instrument in future. I also believe that it is not entirely accurate to say that it is not the amount of funding made available that matters. Many of the NGOs working in this field have told us that the Commission’s estimate of an annual cost of EUR 6.1 billion can only be considered an absolute minimum. We will therefore have the task of ensuring that not only a separate instrument, but also sufficient funding, is made available. I can see the attraction in an integrated approach, but I share Mrs Haug’s views, who said that the situation is similar to what we have seen in the case of policies on women’s issues; for years anyone who did not wish to give any consideration to women’s issues said that there was no need to do so because of gender mainstreaming. Everybody then waited for progressive policies on women’s issues and equal opportunities to miraculously appear. If an integrated approach is to be adopted, then what is needed is a dual strategy; integration into existing funds, but a separate financial instrument in future."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph