Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-03-17-Speech-5-044"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20000317.5.5-044"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Mr President, can I begin by thanking my colleague from Wales – though from another party, Jillian Evans, for raising this issue. I do not think that there is a more important issue in Wales at the moment than the application of Objective 1 funds and it is important to look at the background to the issues that we are currently considering.
There are two major news stories breaking in the United Kingdom today. One is the shock news of BMW's decision to break up the Rover-Land Rover Group with the threat of massive redundancies right the way across the UK and the other breaking news this morning is the Conservative Party's stunning victory in the Ayr by-election driving the defending Labour Party into a miserable third place with a swing of almost 10%.
Now these stories are not just topical background to this debate. In my view, they underpin the very issues which we are considering in the context of Structural Fund spending under Objectives 1 and 2 in those parts of the European Union which are facing major economic problems. As we have already heard from Jillian Evans, a major part of Wales, in constituencies which I also represent, has been granted Objective 1 status, but sadly ever since that announcement was made by the Commission, our problems in Wales have actually got even worse. As a direct result of what I would describe as UK government policy, our agricultural economy has all but collapsed. Farm incomes are at their lowest level for a generation and this decline is also hitting the manufacturing sector.
I do not apologise for saying that the massive overvaluation of sterling which gives the UK Labour Chancellor an electoral war-chest of unprecedented proportions has handicapped every Welsh and UK manufacturer trying to export into the European market. It is little wonder that BMW blames the Rover decision directly on UK government economic policy, but that I fear is little comfort to the thousands of workers in Rover who have strained to improve the efficiency of the company only to find that their efforts have been undermined in Downing Street.
I turn then to the central hand of Labour government at work in terms of the European Structural Funds package. The unacceptable behaviour of the UK Government over this has already brought about the timely end of the political career of the first Secretary of the Welsh Assembly. Sadly, the Structural Funds spending issues have been marked by delay by disputes in relation to matched funding and also in relation to the issue of additionality. Lest it be raised later in this debate let me make it clear: this is not a new issue and I share the view that it is an issue that needs to be examined very carefully by the Commission itself.
I have the honour to be appointed as the rapporteur on the Economic and Monetary Affairs Committee for the Structural Funds guidelines 2000-2006 and the committee agreed on that occasion, based on our recommendations to the Regional Policy Committee, that the Commission should pay attention to this issue of additionality. We reiterated the importance of ensuring that Structural Funds do not just merely, as it were, replace public spending otherwise earmarked for those areas that are lagging behind. I am rather sorry that the Regional Policy Committee did not incorporate that in the report themselves, but there it is.
There are a number of questions that I would ask Commissioner Liikanen to take back to Commissioner Barnier. I appreciate that he is the Commissioner in office today but he may not be in a position to respond to these points himself. However, these are points that I seek to put in the context of certainly the area that I represent and I daresay they are points that would be supported by Jillian Evans on behalf of her party. What progress is being made in relation to the approval of the programming documents within the Commission? Will the Commissioner take the step in terms of transparency of publishing at an appropriate time the correspondence that has taken place between the Commission and the National Assembly? We were assured, I am bound to say by a rather complacent Economic Secretary, who has now become the First Secretary, that all matters were proceeding in an orderly fashion. Yet we hear from remarks that are made from time to time by the Commission that there are real problems and we find it difficult to do our job within this Parliament without that degree of transparency.
So, will the Commission undertake to make that information available to all Members of the European Parliament? Will they undertake to keep us informed in relation to these matters? Will they undertake to challenge Member State Governments in relation to the maps that have been drawn up in relation to Objective 2 where also there has been quite clear evidence of jerrymandering also. The additionality issue is an important one, but I must say it is not the only one which gives much concern to many Members of this European Parliament."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples