Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-09-06-Speech-3-158"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2000-09-06"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Votes2
dcterms:Language	"fr"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20000906.5.3-158"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2000-09-06-Speech-3-1592
lpv:speaker	lp:Gérard Caudron2
lpv:spokenAs	member; Delegation to the EU-Poland Joint Parliamentary Committee (1999-10-06--2002-01-14)3 unknown; Parti socialiste (1999-07-20--2002-07-09)3 member; Committee on Industry, External Trade, Research and Energy (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 substitute; Delegation to the EU-Cyprus Joint Parliamentary Committee (1999-10-08--2002-01-14)3 substitute; Committee on Foreign Affairs, Human Rights, Common Security and Defence Policy (1999-07-22--2002-01-14)3 member_of_the_bureau; PES (1999-07-20--2002-01-16)3 substitute; Temporary committee on the Echelon interception system (2000-07-06--2001-09-05)3
lpv:translated text	". I am pleased to have the opportunity today to speak about this report, which was drafted in response to a request by the European Parliament in the framework of negotiations on the revision of the budget for the first phase of Socrates, in 1998. This socio-economic investigation, which was carried out during the latter part of 1998, is based on the answers sent in by around 10 000 students who participated in “mobility actions” during 1997-98. The Erasmus programme was set up in 1987 as part of the Socrates programme, and absorbs 40% of the total Socrates budget. Erasmus seeks to encourage the mobility of students by developing the European dimension of education and by enabling young people to carry out part of their studies in another Member State. The Socrates programme entered its second phase with the decision of 24 January 2000. It is, moreover, a pity that this report took so long after the Socrates II programme was formally adopted to publish its conclusions, which, as a result, could not be taken into consideration. Everyone is agreed on welcoming this initiative, thanks to which 90 000 students every year take up the opportunity to study abroad. More than nine out of ten of those students claimed to be very satisfied with their stay abroad, both from the educational and the socio-cultural points of view. It must be admitted, however, that the participation rate is still low, given that this programme involves 18 Member States. This is what the Commission inquiry has shown: only 1% of students took part in Erasmus mobility programmes in 1998. We therefore still have a great deal to do if we are to achieve the target of 10%, which the programme is aiming for. We must therefore try to discover the reasons for such a low participation rate. The survey does provide us with some answers. We see that more than 57% of Erasmus students encounter financial difficulties. It is nevertheless young people from privileged backgrounds who go abroad, which is an unacceptable form of discrimination, which we must combat by allocating special aid to the less well-off socio-economic categories. Many problems remain in the field of the recognition of qualifications. As Member for a border area, I regularly meet graduates who are distraught because the courses they have studied in another Member State are not recognised. I shall conclude by appealing to the French Presidency to include all of these factors in the study paper that it has asked the Vision group to undertake on transnational mobility in education. This study paper should lead to the presentation, at the Nice Summit, of an action plan which seeks to overcome the obstacles to this mobility."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph