Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-02-22-Speech-2-169"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20050222.12.2-169"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, Commissioner, in Germany we have a rule that is no less clear for being unwritten, namely that he who places an order foots the bill, and indeed it is a well-known fact that very little happens in this EU of ours without money. The European Union ordered, or rather instigated, the establishment of the Natura 2000 network throughout Europe. Yet the EU has still not provided a precise definition of what kind of measures must be taken, what kind of regulations must be adopted or what kind of arrangements must be made with regard to the sites that have been designated, and indeed this fact was pointed out a short time ago by Commissioner Dimas.
The annual cost of Natura 2000 has now been estimated by the Commission to be EUR 6.1 billion. This is a great deal of money, yet at the same time it is very little for all 25 Member States, depending on the final scope of the programme. At present management plans for SACs have to be drawn up on a national and regional basis, and it is not hard to see that each area will have varying requirements when it comes to a field as complex as environmental protection, and that different measures will therefore need to be put in place. Questions still remain, such as the instances in which greater expenditure will become necessary, and whether there should be changes to land use, given that this would mean a shortfall in income and financial losses for agricultural undertakings.
The Commission is now proposing that money spent on these commitments should come from existing EU funds. This is a source of some concern to me, and it would mean that a struggle for funding of the kind referred to by Mr Florenz would be inevitable. A separate financial instrument must be created that allows compensation to be granted in every instance where restrictions have been imposed as a result of Natura 2000 sites being designated.
That, Mrs Haug, is what the farmers are calling for. It is intolerable that an increase in funding for SAC compensation should occur at the expense of agricultural and environmental measures or of other rural development programmes. Sufficient funding must be provided by the European Union for any additional tasks and costly obligations it imposes. This would then safeguard the substance of Natura 2000."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples