Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-07-04-Speech-2-038"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2006-07-04"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:ERDF, ESF, Cohesion Fund (general provisions) – Establishment of a Cohesion Fund – European Social Fund – European Regional Development Fund – European grouping of territorial cooperation (EGTC) (debate)2
dcterms:Language	"pt"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20060704.5.2-038"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2006-07-04-Speech-2-0392
lpv:speaker	lp:Pedro Guerreiro2
lpv:spokenAs	member; REGI (2005-03-08--2007-01-14)3 member; PECH (2005-03-08--2007-01-14)3 member; EUL/NGL (2005-01-13--2009-07-13)3 substitute; TRAN (2005-01-18--2007-01-14)3 unknown; Partido Comunista Português (2005-01-13--2009-07-13)3 member; Delegation to the EU-Mexico Joint Parliamentary Committee (2005-03-08--2009-07-13)3 substitute; Delegation to the ACP-EU Joint Parliamentary Assembly (2005-01-18--2009-07-13)3
lpv:translated text	". Since the outset of negotiations on the Structural Funds for 2007-2013, we have stressed that a properly funded, proactive EU regional policy is a prerequisite for effectively reducing regional imbalances at EU level and for genuine convergence between the Member States. As regards the Community budget, regional policy should be an instrument of much-needed, fair redistribution, which will at the very least reduce the detrimental impact of the internal market on the economically least-developed countries and regions. Consequently, we must adopt a critical stance as regards this General Regulation on the Structural Funds, which translates into legislative terms the Interinstitutional Agreement on the amounts, the objectives and the implementation rules of the Structural Funds for 2007-2013. This Agreement represents a reduction in the Structural Funds from 0.41% of Community GNI in 2000-2006 to 0.37% for 2007-2013, despite the fact that the need for cohesion is all the greater following the enlargement and that, in view of the economic and social disparities, the trend ought to be upward rather than downward. Therein also lies the reason why, for example, the so-called statistical effect regions, such as the Algarve region of Portugal have not been completely compensated, something that we consider unacceptable. We also object to aspects such as the subordination of Cohesion Policy to the objectives of the so-called Lisbon Strategy, with the inclusion of the objective of allocating at least 60% of funds in the convergence regions and 75% in the other regions towards funding projects laid down in the Lisbon Strategy. In other words, cohesion is playing second fiddle to competition. I should lastly like to lend my backing to Mr Henin's remarks about certain cross-border regions, such as Hainaut in France and Belgium, which has differentiated access to the Structural Funds. This situation must be rectified so that the region can grow harmoniously."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph