Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-12-12-Speech-3-121"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20011212.3.3-121"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
I fully agree with the conclusions reached by Mr Turchi. I would reiterate the points made by the Committee on Regional Policy, Transport and Tourism with regard to the lack of information on financing provided by national, regional and local bodies and by the private sector for the completion of TEN projects, since 95% of the financing still comes from outside the EU. There is also a lack of information on specific investment in modes of transport via EIB loans, the financial instruments for third countries, other public and private programmes and the Structural Funds themselves that is broken down by transport mode. Indeed, the Commission only provided information broken down by transport mode for budget heading B5-0700.
We feel we should also point out that, in future, the Commission should attach to the report a clear, simple table containing dependable, transparent data which can not just be used to monitor the correct use of the amounts already made over but will also improve the scope for planning. This is a monitoring procedure which the Commission’s report reserved exclusively for the 14 priority projects established at Essen which, as we know, are not the only ones on the list.
Finally, I feel I must draw the Commission’s attention to the need to address properly, once again, the issue of Corridor 8 – which does not even feature in the White Paper – and peripheral regions, which are isolated even more by the excessive focus on Trans-European railway lines and the neglect of the air transport crisis."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples