Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-04-04-Speech-2-281"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20060404.23.2-281"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
".
It is a very difficult question. It is very difficult to see what balance is in this case, because the issues and problems faced by those regions are very different. Some of our regions suffer because they are very sparsely populated and that means that infrastructure costs are very high. This is a challenge not only for us at European level but also for the governments involved. Other regions suffer from overpopulation and from problems of migration. Therefore, it is very difficult to measure what is balanced and what is not.
As you know, within this very restrictive budget during the Council – which is also part of the European tradition – there were also additional requests put on the table. What I presented – all those additional measures which were offered to the regions – is something that came during the Council and was not part of a global balanced proposal of the Commission.
We have to look at the current situation and try to make those resources work as well as possible and try to use the resources that were allocated to the sparsely populated regions of Sweden and Finland in the most efficient way and do the best we can. However, I do not see a need to compare the EUR 540 million that Finland and Sweden received for those regions to the money allocated to the outermost regions. The situations are very different: the money has a different value. The Commission will certainly work with both types of problems – in the outermost regions and the sparsely populated regions – to get the best we can from the funds which will be available."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples