Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-12-14-Speech-4-116"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20001214.2.4-116"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, first of all, I would like to thank and congratulate Helmuth Markov on his constructive, extremely competent and serious presentation of the draft communication on these innovative measures under the ERDF for the period 2000-2006.
First, energy efficiency. Mrs Schroedter or Mr Rack raised this point. As you know, I too am acutely aware of it. Do not forget that I have long been committed to ecological questions. I had the honour of serving as Minister of the Environment for my country and I bear this concern in mind as a priority in the measures taken under the Structural Funds. Energy efficiency and aspects of environmental policy have not been overlooked in the guidelines and may give rise to innovative measures relating to the third issue, which is regional identity and sustainable development. I would add that the European Commission, as you know, is already supporting energy efficiency through the SAVE programme and through one of the thematic programmes under the fifth framework programme for research for 1998-2002. In addition, the purpose of the Alterner programme is to support renewable sources of energy That is all I have to say on this point, to which I shall continue to attach a great deal of importance.
As far as the scope of regional partnerships is concerned – Mr Bradbourn again stressed this point, and I know how tenacious he can be – we agree on the need to strengthen our links with the private sector and, beyond the private sector, with universities, research centres and non-governmental organisations. In this respect, the steering committee which we have planned for each programme will play a key role in stimulating cooperation and defining regional innovation strategies. And I also apply what I say here about partnerships on innovative measures as a reality check for these partnerships when it comes to the programming documents of the Community Support Frameworks or the Structural Funds in general.
The third point is the need to stress the education and training opportunities which you mention in your report, Mr Markov. Of course, I agree that it is important to improve professional skills in Europe. We have taken certain aspects on board in order to help SMEs find ways of meeting their needs for staff with computing skills. That is why, when I am involved in negotiations – as I am currently with regard to SPDs – I take great care to check, over and above the innovative measures – and I refer here to the mainstream – that each programming document includes a regional information society access plan, and I check the quality, over and above the scope of the regional programme, especially as relates directly to SMEs, education institutes and even farm holdings.
That is what we wanted to highlight on this point. However, I understand that this concern needs to be coordinated with other instruments, especially – as you suggested earlier Mr Markov – with the European Social Fund.
I should now like to comment briefly on the disappointment which several of you have expressed, as does the report, at our approach in this programme, as proposed in this report. I understand your wish to maintain direct links between the European Union and regional and local players. That is why we have instructed the competent authorities in the regions to submit regional programmes of innovative measures.
However, we wish projects to be selected at regional level, as Mr Berend understood in his intervention.
Regional and local players are obviously better placed to respond to grass roots expectations and it is certainly easier for small- and medium-sized enterprises to discuss their funding requirements with regional authorities than with Brussels. This concern reflects that expressed by Mr Howitt.
I am also positive that, because they are innovative, these programmes will be visible and will have an effect on the mainstream
I see these measures as laboratories and I am very interested in their impact and in their future as part of the mainstream within the framework of the Structural Funds.
I fully share your interest in cooperation networks and activities between regions. This aspect is important and I am happy to inform you that, following your observations, we have amended and corrected the guidelines with a view to improving the potential for the regions to take part in inter-regional networks.
Several of you voiced your concern over the financial package. I must be content, as must you, with the funds provided in the Berlin guidelines and the Agenda 2000 package.
Ladies and gentlemen, I have noted very closely the ideas and suggestions which many of you have put forward and I shall come back to them shortly. However, I shall start with Mr Markov's report which, in many respects, mirrors, supplements and strengthens the Commission's approach and objectives, especially on two points, Mr Markov.
Mrs Schroedter, Mr Izquierdo Collado and Mr Ortuondo Larrea quite rightly raised the issue of financial packages. I must remind you that most of these measures relate to investments in intangibles and to a limited number of issues and measures. I am also positive that, even with these necessarily limited sums, we may still exercise a significant leverage effect and impact on all the Structural Funds programmes. I also share your wish to take recourse to the package of appropriations decided within the framework of Agenda 2000 in order to implement innovative measures. I have also taken note of your interest in the opportunities offered by the flexibility instrument.
The Commission's response to Mr Pohjamo's question on the same subject pointed out that this package could be increased if there was felt to be a need for Community action and if the funds available, the budgetary conditions and the capacity for implementation so allowed. In this context, the Commission shall examine closely the possibility of taking recourse to the flexibility instrument. I would like to assure you, as far as the transfer number 42 000 is concerned, that this transfer will not affect my intention or the Commission's intention to earmark EUR 400 million for innovative measures under the ERDF within the terms of the regulation.
Thank you for your suggestions. Thank you, Mr Markov, for an excellent report which allows us to improve and gives a better understanding of the guidelines which have been proposed to you and which we are now ready to implement, as quickly as possible, following Parliament's vote.
May I take this opportunity to wish you a Happy Christmas and to thank you for the quality of our joint efforts throughout 2000.
The first is that we need to ensure that the poorest or less developed regions are not sidelined from technological progress and are integrated into the information economy on an equal footing. You yourself referred to the gap between the poor regions – between the ten poorest and the ten richest regions – but if you analyse the figures, you will be forced to see that the gaps are even wider in these regions when it comes to simple criteria such as the number of Internet connections. We have noted these gaps and diagnosed the risk of a digital divide, as it is referred to in the current debate raging in America, which is why, ladies and gentlemen – and I shall perhaps come back to this later – I chose to propose, on the Commission's behalf, that two out of three innovative measures, two major priorities, should be geared to this digital divide, mainly by taking account of the poorest or most remote regions. That is the first point on which we concur.
The second point, which you have reiterated in your report, is that our common objective is to integrate innovative measures into a regional policy which has economic and social cohesion and sustainable development as its priorities.
Having obtained plenary's opinion during this part-session and the views of the Member States, these guidelines are due for final adoption right at the beginning of 2001, meaning that we can start preparing regional programmes of innovative measures ready for approval and submission on 31 May 2001.
Allow me, ladies and gentlemen, to remind you of our objectives in these guidelines. Compared with the priority topics which were selected and which I wanted to present personally to the Committee on Regional Policy on 11 September, I should like to remind you that these innovative measures are first and foremost a regional development instrument. As Mr Rack quite rightly said, I have never construed this regional policy and this cohesion policy as some sort of alms to the poorest regions and I never shall. We are talking solidarity here, we are clearly stating and making it clearly understood that access to new technology and to the information society is not a luxury for the richest regions and you will never stop seeing me act or hearing me voice the demand that the poorest and most remote regions – which are often one and the same – have just as much right as everyone else to join the information society on an equal footing.
So these are the priorities. I repeat – as Mr Berend reminded us earlier – that the Commission hopes to use these innovative measures as experimental and good practice laboratories so that, in time, the quality of the Structural Fund programmes cofinanced by the ERDF are improved. That is why we selected these three priorities – technological innovation, the information society and regional identity and sustainable development – as our strategic priorities.
Separately or combined, these issues will have a major contribution to make to regional development over coming years, especially – and I say this for a third time – for the poorest regions. Mr Mastorakis and Mr Nogueira have stressed this point.
I should now like to respond in greater detail to the points touched on or raised in the draft report and in your various questions."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples