Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-12-11-Speech-2-115"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20011211.7.2-115"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, the Commission’s annual report on Trans-European Networks provides a general outlook on Community assistance in the three main areas of TENs (transport, energy and telecommunications), which are financed either through the general Union budget or through other Community sources such as the EIB and the Cohesion Fund. I believe that, overall, it is a good report, if one also takes into account the fact that 1999 was a pivotal year for this sector, in fact, 1999 saw the modification of the financial regulation, the approval of the financial framework for 2000-2006 and the creation of ISPA; this year, 50% of the funding was devoted to transport infrastructure works and the emergence of Galileo as a new and priority TEN project. This does not mean, however, that there are no criticisms to be levelled at the Commission; these derive above all from the type of report it has given us and not from the implementation of the Trans-European Networks.
The first criticism I intend to make about the report concerns the lack of references to the qualitative development of TEN projects. Very often, the initiation and completion of projects have taken much longer than expected because of procedural differences and a lack of coordination. In several cases, Member States have had different priorities, while the notion of public or private partnership is not yet well developed. In future, therefore, the Commission should attach additional information on the projects to its reports, such as, for instance, the original plans, timetables and the results achieved. This would, first and foremost, increase transparency and thus also permit more effective and productive monitoring of the situation.
Secondly, the financial evaluation of TENs should include information on funding through local, regional and national budgets and also through private resources, since roughly 80% of the total funds comes from these sources. It would thus be possible to obtain an overall view of the state of funding and to check that the commitments undertaken by Member States are maintained.
Thirdly, I believe that the financial resources available for TENs are too limited in view of the continual challenges faced by the transport sector. The percentage of TEN activities funded by the general budget is constantly falling, while EIB loans cover more than three-quarters of the funding in this sector, and this is highlighted. My view is that the funding package for transport TENs should be reviewed and adapted to actual needs, especially in light of the reductions in other sectors, such as the environment.
Lastly, I believe we must properly address the problem of road traffic, the constant increase in which runs contrary to the objectives that were proposed when TENs were created. I think this is due to a lack of cross-border cooperation, which necessarily undermines the interoperability and promotion of rail networks. To get round this problem it will, I think, be necessary to gradually shift the emphasis away from the Essen priority projects and national infrastructure projects towards transit and cross-border projects, so as to strengthen the policy of sustainable transport and promote integration between different modes of transport.
In conclusion, I should also like to mention the budget that we are about to vote on. I believe we have come to the end of two not inconsiderable political problems which reflect the additional needs which have emerged in view of the changed international situation. In second reading, we have left an ample margin for assistance to Afghanistan and neighbouring regions, and with the Council we have agreed on the figure of EUR 488 million for cooperation with developing countries in Asia. Once again, then, we have given evidence of our political sensitivity and lent our support to the common foreign and security policy.
It was unthinkable that the Union might absent itself at a time like this, and it was also unthinkable that Parliament might default after the explicit request by the Council. This does not, however, mean that everything is fine and that no criticisms should be made. Nevertheless, I must especially congratulate the rapporteurs, Mr Costa Neves and Mrs Buitenweg, as well as all the Secretariat staff who have helped and supported us through both good and difficult moments."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples