Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-02-28-Speech-4-039"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20020228.3.4-039"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, the unique thing about the Youth Programme is that it really is open to all young people and, at an age when characters are formed, facilitates direct European experiences to do that, and gives their lives the European dimension. The European Youth Programme was adopted on 13 April 2000 and runs for seven years up to 2006. It is aimed at young people of between 15 and 25 years of age as well as at people involved in the youth work field and is funded with EUR 520 million. Thirty countries take part in the programme – the Member States, and also Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway and the candidate countries with the exception of Turkey and Malta.
Its management is highly decentralised, so that 70% is spent via the national agencies. In 2000, 10 029 projects, costing something over EUR 80 million, were financed, enabling 103 784 participants to be involved, which corresponds to an implementation rate of 98.5%, which is an excellent quota, bearing in mind the late start to the programme.
As we had wished, it was possible, in the various actions, to achieve balanced allocation of resources between youth exchange and voluntary service. We would, though, like the Commission to give us even clearer and sounder figures for the five action areas when the more detailed report is forthcoming. Action 1 – Youth for Europe – covers meetings of groups of young people and youth exchange, and Action 2 – European voluntary service – is aimed at young people who go to another country for between six and twelve months to do voluntary work. Action 3 comprises initiatives in the field of youth work, Action 4 supports initiatives that transcend the boundaries of Socrates and Leonardo. In 2000, there were no projects in Action 5, which deals with support measures.
Over and over again, in the first year of the programme, we heard complaints about the length of time it took to process applications. As a rule, it took four to five months from the date the application was made for the centrally-managed projects to grant funds. Thankfully, the Commission picked up on our criticism in the course of the procedure and arranged for things to be speeded up. I hope that we will continue to work well with the Commission in this area in order to guarantee the participants in the projects speedy and unbureaucratic procedures.
There were also start-up problems in the distribution of the appropriations for the programme to the national agencies. I hope that the funds advanced do not give rise to further incidental costs and make matters too difficult for the projects. It is extremely difficult to carry out a gender-specific assessment of the programme. I would like us to get more precise data from the Commission and for them to take care to work towards gender balance in the participants, in order, above all, that young women, including those from groups of disadvantaged young people, do not lose out.
One of Parliament's priorities was to involve disadvantaged young people in the programme to a greater extent. According to the Commission, 50% of the centrally-managed projects were able to include disadvantaged young people. This was more difficult in the decentralised projects. There is a need for further work here. There is also a need to improve the way national agencies share experience with each other.
The involvement of the candidate countries was accompanied by some difficulties, with the legal basis being adopted rather late in the day and the granting of visas often being problematic. It is my plea, as a matter of urgency, for participants from the candidate countries to receive visas automatically, in an unbureaucratic way and without charge. Overall administration costs in the first year were very high, and this was because the Commission had met the costs for two years in advance. I think that is acceptable. We also welcomed the objective of involving smaller organisations without international experience, so that young people who are not members of organisations can also have better access to the programme. We intend to be continually on the ball about this.
It is because I believe that our successes need to be sold better and with vigour that I suggest that we mount a week-long campaign in order to present the programme to the public. Let me say in conclusion that the Member States must not cut back on their own youth exchange programmes. They must introduce the European dimension into their national policies to a greater extent. We are getting encouraging indications from the process of consultation on the White Paper and I hope that the Youth Programme's new impetus for Europe's young people will give us the core of this new youth policy."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples