Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2008-01-16-Speech-3-076"
Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
---|---|
rdf:type | |
dcterms:Date | |
dcterms:Is Part Of | |
dcterms:Language | |
lpv:document identification number |
"en.20080116.2.3-076"2
|
lpv:hasSubsequent | |
lpv:speaker | |
lpv:spoken text |
"Mr President, thank you for this very interesting debate, where I think there was a very large consensus supporting the priorities that were presented by the Slovenian Presidency. During my first statement I highlighted some – because I could not go into detail on all aspects – of the priorities for our work during these six months: the ratification of the Lisbon Treaty, the new cycle of the Lisbon Strategy and also our climate and energy package. Specifically on this point, I was very encouraged by the support that many of you gave to our work on this matter. It is very important that we now deliver on our commitments.
At the same time, I agree that we have to check that no Structural Funds money is used to finance a specific delocalisation of a company. That would be unfair competition. But I call on all those who are pro-European to stand up and defend this united enlarged Europe, and also to exploit the benefits that we all, in all the new Member States, are getting from this more dynamic Europe that we can build today.
The Heads of State and Government agreed on ambitious targets – a 20% reduction in the emission of greenhouse gases and 20% for renewables. We cannot have the targets and then not deliver on the means of achieving those targets. It is a question of coherence and of credibility, and I was very encouraged by the support given to this during today’s debate.
I would like just to answer one question that was brought to the debate by Mr Schulz, Mr Lambsdorff and Mr Brok regarding a specific problem that is now being discussed in Germany – the question of possible funding for relocation of a company in Europe. I can tell you that the operational programme on competitiveness for Romania has a specific clause banning the use of Structural Funds for the cofinancing of delocalisation. The European Commission has not received any project relevant to this issue, so the Commission can confirm that no European regional development funding is implicated in this relocation. Of course we consider that it would be unacceptable to use funding from European Union funds for relocation inside the European Union.
At the same time it is true that the European Union, through the PHARE programme, has funded an industrial park in Romania where several companies are now investing. This is important and I will draw the attention of all my colleagues here, especially our German friends, to this debate and how important it is to have a responsibility in this debate.
We have to make a distinction between delocalisation outside the European Union and relocation in Europe. If investment goes from Finland to Germany, it can also go from Germany to Romania. Let us be honest about it. We have to make clear that this is not delocalisation outside the European Union. As you remember, the Commission and I have proposed a Globalisation Adjustment Fund that is already working precisely for cases where some jobs could be affected by delocalisations outside the European Union. It is very important that European leaders at all levels in the European Union – in the Commission, in the European Parliament, but also at national level – also have the courage to explain the benefits of enlargement.
Germany is the country that is now exporting more to the new Member States. The enlargement of the European Union is creating jobs in Germany too. German companies are also investing a lot in the new Member States. So it very important from a European perspective that we all explain that enlargement of the European Union is not only good for the new Members but it is also an opportunity for the European Union as a whole."@en1
|
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples