Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-07-05-Speech-2-169"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2005-07-05"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Structural Funds2
dcterms:Language	"pl"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20050705.26.2-169"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2005-07-05-Speech-2-1702
lpv:speaker	lp:Tadeusz Zwiefka2
lpv:spokenAs	member; Delegation to the EU-Armenia, EU-Azerbaijan and EU-Georgia Parliamentary Cooperation Committees (2004-09-15--2009-07-13)3 member; JURI (2004-07-21--2007-01-14)3 member; EPP-ED (2004-07-20--2009-07-13)3 substitute; Delegation to the EU-Moldova Parliamentary Cooperation Committee (2005-03-31--2009-07-13)3 substitute; Delegation for relations with the Mashreq countries (2005-03-31--2007-03-13)3 unknown; Platforma Obywatelska (2004-07-20--2009-07-13)3 substitute; Delegation to the EU-Bulgaria Joint Parliamentary Committee (2005-03-31--2006-12-31)3 substitute; EMPL (2004-07-22--2007-01-14)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, we are all fully aware of the fact that the number of goals we are setting ourselves, and the number of needs that must be met, exceeds by far the funds at our disposal. It is therefore quite obvious that these funds must be programmed as well as possible and put to the most effective use possible. This is the aim behind the amendments that have been tabled to the next Financial Perspective. It is quite incomprehensible, however, that certain principles that have proved their worth and functioned properly to date have been abandoned. I am thinking in particular of the multi-fund approach, which makes it possible for the funds needed to implement a single task to be combined as effectively as possible at Member State level, or in other words for the money to be used as the country in question sees fit. This approach is now going to be changed by restricting cross-financing to 5%. Why change a rule that works well, and for which the administrative instruments have already been put in place and staff trained? Why change a rule that allows for greater freedom of decision-making in operational planning and in implementing tasks? Another issue I wish to raise is funding for housing. I obviously agree with the changes proposed by the Commission to the effect that funding for housing is not permitted as such, and I am delighted that Mrs Hübner has explained that expenditure on housing that results in energy savings and environmental protection is eligible. Since I come from a new Member State, Poland, however, I would like to draw your attention to the fact that social housing in the countries of the former Communist bloc mainly consists of prefabricated blocks of flats, which are no longer environmentally friendly, and which in many instances are extremely unsafe. It would therefore be worth giving some thought to whether it would be a good idea to fund the regeneration of such buildings under the Cohesion Fund, since it is impossible for the necessary number of homes to be completely rebuilt from scratch."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph