Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-09-24-Speech-2-216"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2002-09-24"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:General debate on the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 20032
dcterms:Language	"pt"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20020924.10.2-216"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2002-09-24-Speech-2-2172
lpv:speaker	lp:Paulo Casaca2
lpv:spokenAs	vice-chair; CONT (2002-01-22--2004-07-19)3 member; Delegation for relations with Switzerland, Iceland and Norway (2002-02-07--2004-07-19)3 unknown; Partido Socialista (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 member; PES (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 substitute; BUDG (2002-01-30--2004-07-19)3 substitute; Delegation to the EU-Slovenia Joint Parliamentary Committee (2002-02-07--2004-04-30)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, Commissioner, when we see the Commission produce a proposal for which we in this Parliament have been fighting, such as the creation of a solidarity fund for communities affected by natural disasters, we must of course offer our most sincere congratulations. Some items in this proposal, however, are somewhat confusing, and I should like the Commissioner to clarify them. Firstly, why did the Commission decide to extend the coverage of this type of disaster in its proposal, to disasters of an environmental and technological nature? Secondly, the Structural Fund must under no circumstances be confused with this solidarity fund. This makes it hard to see on what basis the Structural Funds fall under this regulation. Would a general rule that cautioned against the dual use of the solidarity fund with measures already funded by any other instrument not suffice? Thirdly, the reference to absolute costs of disasters makes no sense, because this of course most benefits the large economies and, furthermore, it is hard to understand why no reference is made to the financial capacity of each State as a criterion for the aid to be granted by the Community. Lastly and most crucially, we fail to understand why the regulation gives no consideration to a clear typology for the situation of outermost regions that have been most badly affected by natural disasters and I would ask the Commissioner how they can, in fact, be covered by this proposal."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph