Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-02-06-Speech-3-307"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20020206.12.3-307"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, I would like to start by congratulating Mr Musotto on his excellent work. It is difficult to not repeat points which have already been made by other speakers at this stage in the debate. I will be brief. One: cohesion policy has proved to be a policy that works, and the report confirms this. It may not work as well as we would expect or like it to, but it is a policy that yields results. What is more, in many regions, for many of our fellow citizens, it is sometimes the only practical, positive, friendly aspect of the European Union that they see. This is an asset which increases the spirit of European citizenship and overall cohesion.
My second point is a fact: we can try to postpone it, ignore it or put off dealing with the issue, but it is still a fact. In practical terms, enlargement will upset the balance and distort the statistics on which we have built this cohesion policy, for we have based it on what is certainly a statistic, the number of inhabitants and the average income disparity which will be created. I feel rather hesitant about advancing proposals on this issue, Commissioner, but I would invite the Commission to be less reticent. Starting to think about the way cohesion policy will have to change in the face of enlargement does not mean placing a question mark over the entire policy of enlargement. My suggestion is that this debate could, perhaps, focus on three factors: resources, as has been said, for it is unthinkable that resources should remain at their current level; the tools, for I feel, for example, that, while the Structural Funds are a tool which is suitable for a cohesion policy which differs greatly from region to region, it may be that the Cohesion Fund, which is less selective, should be rethought, at least in terms of the way its funds are allocated; coordination of the policies. In many cases, where there are no additional resources, coordinated policies could be of benefit such as, for example, tax discounts, which it is still not possible to apply to some regions because of a rigid Commission policy on State aid."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples