Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-03-13-Speech-3-214"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20020313.9.3-214"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs |
vice-chair; Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy (2002-01-22--2004-07-19)3
|
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, Mr Trentin’s work deals very clearly with important matters for the future of the Union, and it does so by appropriately combining economic and social approaches, in a context of involvement and participation, in order to maintain a social security framework, and of innovation as well.
One passage among so many seems significant, however: the one about the need not to wait for the effects of the American recovery. Among the various reasons for agreeing with this statement is that we do not believe fully in the soundness of the revival across the Atlantic. The reversal of the unemployment trend and an upturn on the Nasdaq contrast, in fact, with the sharp rise in oil prices, perhaps because of the winds of war blowing through the oil-producing countries.
Each of these aspects taken alone supports the points raised in the report before us, but they also support the need for it to have a wholly European focus, which includes maintaining the Stability and Growth Pact, because another perplexing aspect in the USA is, paradoxically, the increase in floating capital, perhaps as an intentional inflationary nudge to level off the huge public investments that have been made. This is an aspect that Europe cannot allow itself, with fifteen economies that are sometimes profoundly different from each other.
Of course, the expectation is that as soon as possible the Union will achieve effective open coordination – in social as well as economic policy – with joint consideration of fiscal policies, but with the warning that without constant, real grass-roots participation there will be no economic growth that can be enjoyed by the general public. The reference to greater participation by local players is explicit, as the second report on cohesion has shown, but from the standpoint of enlargement there is also a clear reference to wider enjoyment, or at least greater access to information regarding Community support, since the fact is that the EAGGF, for instance, has reported significantly low take-up rates in the Member States. Similarly, what is needed for the countries of Central and Eastern Europe, besides the hoped-for transparency about future action and the procedures for it, is the constructive requirement that the ways in which pre-accession funds are used should be better monitored, bearing in mind that in these countries, still coming to grips with setting up an own resources system, there are generally not enough funds available to support cofinancing.
It is, in fact, extremely difficult to justify scientifically, as the Union demands, the inclusion of environmental sites on the Natura 2000 list before the Trans-European Networks are built. In the latter respect, more and better participation by the countries of Central and Eastern Europe in Community plans and programmes would be welcome, as would their greater participation in transport policy, including attention to Community corridors.
In conclusion, what I am trying to say is that not only are the economic and social plans extremely opportune, but so is the harmonious and integrated way they are implemented, with a vision that goes from the new, near borders…"@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples