Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-10-09-Speech-3-137"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20021009.9.3-137"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs |
substitute; Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3,3
|
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, Commissioner, many Members have already stressed the value of the solidarity – and this fund is called the ‘Solidarity Fund’ – which is implied in and is the corner stone, the heart of the measure on which we are about to vote. We are building a Europe of solidarity.
I would, however, like to highlight another value which I believe is absolutely central to this initiative – and we have all supported it and contributed to its timely achievement
and that is the political benefit to be gained from it. I feel, Commissioner, that there have been very few situations or events in which many, very many of our fellow citizens have for the first time felt that Europe is genuinely close to them, that it is truly an elder brother ready to run to their aid when they are in difficulties. We must never forget that, in some cases, the only experience many of our fellow citizens have had of the European institutions is of a set of rules and regulations, bans and directives. I believe there is a political benefit to be gained from showing them the friendly side of Europe, as we are doing in this case, particularly at times such as this – and we are approaching a major referendum now, we all know the details – a political benefit which we must not allow to go to waste.
How are we to avoid wasting it? Commissioner, you put it very well and I fully agree with you. We cannot make this instrument, which was designed to respond to emergencies, rigid, unadaptable or inflexible, in other words an instrument which becomes ineffective or which is even in danger of not being used precisely because the rules to which we are linking it are too complex. We must maintain a certain flexibility in this matter and I can see that you are quite aware of this but – and this is the last point to which I would like to draw your attention, even though, I regret, you are not listening to me – I also feel that we must view this merely as an initial step.
Ladies and gentlemen, nobody here wants to see events such as these repeated, but we have a responsibility to be realistic. Soon, there will be 25 Member States, and it is quite clear that the climate is changing. I am afraid that, statistically, it is realistic to expect more such tragedies to occur.
Therefore, in the face of tragic events which, I am afraid, will be repeated, I do not feel that EUR 1 billion will suffice. We must endeavour to explore further possibilities for the future, Commissioner, for the 2004 budget, if possible. I will only make one suggestion at a time, and I would like to hear your opinion too. Why do we not set aside part of our leftover funds – for there is always so much money left at the end of each budget which we do not know how to spend – why do we not use a set amount for this fund? I invite you to reflect on the matter."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples