Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-02-22-Speech-2-180"

PredicateValue (sorted: default)
rdf:type
dcterms:Date
dcterms:Is Part Of
dcterms:Language
lpv:document identification number
"en.20050222.12.2-180"2
lpv:hasSubsequent
lpv:speaker
lpv:spoken text
". Madam President, thank you very much for that constructive debate. The Commission is fully aware of the importance of securing adequate Community cofinancing for Natura 2000, for which the lists have been approved for five of the six regions, with few gaps in the lists. All the new Member States have submitted their lists. The integration approach as proposed is consistent with the intention of Article 8 of the Habitats Directive, which calls for cofinancing from existing funds. It also builds on existing practice, which is that the rural development and structural funds are already the most important sources of Community funding for the network. It is estimated that EUR 500 million is spent each year from rural development funds in support of agri-environment measures for Natura 2000 sites. The Commission has taken note of the concerns with regard to the great limitations of the rural development and structural funds. In response to this, the latest proposals recognise the need to expand the funding opportunities for Natura 2000 compared with the existing situation. In both the rural development and structural fund regulations, funding for Natura 2000 is made more explicit and its scope extended. Of particular significance is the extension of funding for forestry areas in the new rural development regulation. The importance of this cannot be underestimated since forestry areas represent 30% of the Natura 2000 network. The Commission will ensure that the integration of Natura 2000 into existing funds is made more effective by including it as a priority in the strategic guidelines that will be issued to Member States when they commence the preparation of their structural fund programmes. In its negotiations with the Member States on the content of these programmes, the Commission will seek to ensure that the allocations for Natura 2000 match this declared Community priority. The Commission will also have to approve the national and operational programmes presented to it. In respect to the proposal for LIFE+, I wish to stress that it is intended to continue to support Natura 2000. The Member States have the flexibility to set their own priorities and decide the amounts provided for Natura 2000. It may, therefore, be the case that Natura 2000 will attract a far higher percentage of the LIFE resources than is presently the case. Designating a precise amount for Natura 2000 in LIFE+ also risks giving the impression that it would be a dedicated fund capable of covering all the needs of the network. Our proposal is in line with the general principle of integration and simplification of all the other Commission proposals in the context of the Financial Perspectives. There are now ongoing discussions in the Council and in Parliament on the Commission draft regulation for LIFE+. If the European Parliament makes a proposal for an amendment during the legislative process, I will of course be prepared to examine it seriously. In conclusion, the Commission proposals, without offering explicit guarantees, are still able to cover the financial needs for the Natura 2000 network. I encourage you, therefore, to give your support to the various Commission proposals currently before Parliament. I welcome your interest in Natura 2000 and look forward to working with Parliament to ensure its effective implementation as a current central pillar of Community biodiversity policy. Thank you very much for your attention."@en1
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata

Named graphs describing this resource:

1http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/English.ttl.gz
2http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/Events_and_structure.ttl.gz

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph