Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-01-31-Speech-3-038"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20010131.3.3-038"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Thank you for asking this question, Mr Jarzembowski. It is probably the main question to be debated in terms of finance. Let me specify, nonetheless, that the Berlin Financial Perspective made provision to set aside some EUR 39.5 billion for the candidate countries likely to join before 2006, to enable them to be integrated into the current cohesion policy. After 2006, however, they will of course be entitled, like the current Member States, to participate in a policy which will probably be rather different.
My report outlined four possible approaches to cater for the regions which would automatically find themselves above the cut-off threshold as soon as we incorporate a number of very poor countries into the Union, and all I can do at this stage is outline these options. The first option is to continue to apply the strict threshold of 75% of Community GDP which is the current threshold below which regions are eligible for Objective 1 status, and therefore a greater concentration of appropriations. The second option is to link this 75% threshold with a phasing-out policy over a set period, supported by a substantial amount of money, in order to facilitate the transition for regions which, post-enlargement, would suddenly find themselves above that threshold. A third option is to raise the threshold above 75 % to make more regions eligible. In that case, we should probably have to tackle the issue of finance. The fourth option is to have two thresholds, one for regions currently within the Union and one for the regions of countries joining the Union. I am not in a position, nor do I have any wish, to decide the matter right now. I am here to listen to your views. I shall be listening to the views of the Member States, and the members of parliament and elected representatives of these regions. In the end, though, we shall have to opt for one of these four alternatives."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples