Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2010-10-07-Speech-4-078"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2010-10-07"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:EU cohesion and regional policy after 2013 - Future of the European Social Fund (debate)2
dcterms:Language	"ga"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20101007.5.4-078"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2010-10-07-Speech-4-0802
lpv:speaker	lp:Seán Kelly2
lpv:spokenAs	member; REGI (2009-07-16--2012-01-18)3 substitute; CULT (2009-07-16--2012-01-18)3 member; Delegation for relations with the United States (2009-09-16--2014-06-30)3 member; EPP (2009-07-14--2014-06-30)3 unknown; Fine Gael Party (2009-07-14--2014-06-30)3 substitute; Delegation for relations with Canada (2009-09-16--2014-06-30)3
lpv:translated text	"I do not have much time, Mr President. Therefore, I will focus on just a few points. Mr President, firstly, there can be no renationalisation of the ESF just as there can be no renationalisation of CAP. We need more, not less, Europe. Secondly, there is a dire need for simplification in the process of application. I have met groups who did not bother to apply, even though they are entitled to funding, because the application was so complicated. Some actually had to hire an expert to do the application for them. This is ridiculous and must stop. Thirdly, I think there is a need to keep both Objective 1 and Objective 2. I represented my group in Mannheim and I saw the benefits of Objective 2. I think that is important. Finally, I want to say that there is also a need – even though some of my colleagues in the EPP do not agree with me – to look at GDP as not being the exclusive criterion. It should certainly be the main criterion, but not the only one. I think that is a debate we need to have and I look forward to it."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph