Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-11-20-Speech-4-032"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20031120.1.4-032"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, Commissioner, the Commission’s presentation of these seven action programmes more or less simultaneously has given the impression that they have to be adapted to one another and harmonised, but I would like to emphasise that they have quite different subject matters, so that it cannot be conducive to the programmes’ purpose to approximate them. I have to say this about every report that has to do with action programmes, but, as the Commission has been very, very tardy in putting the reports before Parliament, the organisations concerned – including the cultural and educational programmes and of course the women’s programmes – now face the danger that they will get their money in 2004 only after a substantial delay or that the programmes cannot be run at all if – as you have previously stressed – this is not wrapped up by December. That is, of course, highly disadvantageous, and I think this an extremely inopportune time for you to launch a major action of this kind.
On the subject of the transitional stage that you propose in the documents, I would like to ask you what you propose doing if there is no conclusion by December. We need a transitional stage in the event of the legal basis not being complete in due time. Rejecting thirty-five amendments, you appeal to Parliament’s sense of responsibility, telling us that we should make allowances so that the programmes can yet be implemented. When it rejects thirty-five out of over fifty amendments, the Commission cannot be said to possess much in the way either of a sense of responsibility or a conciliatory approach. That means that there still have to be some negotiations here.
Referring specifically to the women’s programme, I would like to add my voice to what has been said by my fellow lady MEPs. The European Women's Lobby is an organisation that concentrates on equal opportunities policy and engages in it with determination, being able to show strength by bringing together many organisations. I do not understand why it is sought to erode this strength by putting it on an equal footing with many other organisations. I therefore endorse the special status of the Women's Lobby and stress that it should be maintained.
I would, finally, like to address the subject of enlargement and take this opportunity to urge that special account be taken of the financial conditions for it, for an additional ten Member States also means that we have to do much more work on women’s issues, and one look at the number of women on the lists will make clear what we mean by that. It is here that we have to work harder, and for that we need more funding. The same financial conditions cannot apply to 25 Member States as did to 15."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples