Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-01-15-Speech-1-093"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20010115.8.1-093"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, it so happens that I was involved in the practical application of the UNESCO Convention in a particular case. At a UNESCO meeting some years ago in Casablanca, the issue was raised of whether to make the entire Alpine Region a World Heritage Site. I confess to feeling somewhat perplexed at this point, for I found the idea of lumping the entire Alpine Region, which covers a whole range of different areas, together as one site rather odd. I was amazed by the frequent discrepancies between the sites selected – certainly not due to any fault of UNESCO's but because of the varying natures of the sites put forward by the States. I also noticed the conspicuous absence of some cultural, natural or mixed sites. In this regard, Mr Costa of our group, who is the mayor of Venice, reminded us ironically, a few days ago, that Venice has never been classified as a World Heritage Site.
Well then, upon reading the Convention my suspicion was confirmed: the 30 year-old Convention is now prehistoric. In the meantime, we have become much more sensitive towards culture and the environment – consider the buzzword 'sustainable development'. This is why I am afraid that the report will prove to be full of inconsistencies: some issues need to be simplified because of the need for coordination between European countries rather than European interventions, which can be unnecessary and are sometimes used by the Member States as an excuse to avoid their responsibilities. Moreover, in certain cases, the structures already exist. I would point out – and this is a positive fact – that the text refers to regional minority languages, which are covered by a range of protective measures.
Nevertheless, there are some good points. I would point out that there must be a policy of active interventions inasmuch as the protection of sites works well if the interventions also include the commitment of financing; the sums referred to by the Convention, which are minimal, are certainly not sufficient for active interventions, especially in Third World countries. It would be a good idea for the Commission, sooner or later, to indicate the limit which State aid may exceed, as laid down in Article 87(3)(d)."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples