Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-05-10-Speech-2-295"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20050510.26.2-295"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
".
As you know, the phasing-in regions are regions that would normally have benefited from the highest Community support, over many years, allowing them to finance all those investments which are necessary to enable them to participate fully in the single market and to create conditions in which companies can operate smoothly.
Once those conditions are in place, priority should be given to other competitiveness factors, such as knowledge, innovation, research and development, and also the quality of human capital. These are in fact the key areas where we propose concentrating Community assistance, in line with the integrated guidelines on jobs and growth which the Commission proposed and the presidency concluded at the Spring European Council. So the natural logic is that we should move to different priorities.
The second issue is, of course, limited resources. Under Objective 2 and the phasing-in transitional scheme, we will have very limited resources, requiring strong targeting of support. The critical mass for growth and competitiveness must be reached as soon as possible. But I must point out that the menu of priorities the Commission proposes under the regulations does not prevent regions from investing in infrastructure to strengthen the secondary networks. This could include improving links to trans-European networks – to regional railways, airports, ports and also multimodal platforms providing radial links to main railway lines – and promoting regional and local inland waterways.
The Commission is, therefore, ready to examine the possibility of introducing a degree of flexibly in the definition of the scope of use of the funds in the phasing-in regions. Consequently, the compromise text of the presidency has already been modified on this point and would allow for a derogation. Such a derogation will have to be duly justified and could concern some priorities financed under the convergence objective. But that could also mean social infrastructure, such as education, health and, possibly, some missing links in the transeuropean networks. So this is all possible. It will have to be justified – most likely on a case-by-case basis – but we are opening up this possibility."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples