Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-11-06-Speech-3-193"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2002-11-06"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:First progress report on economic and social cohesion2
dcterms:Language	"el"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20021106.14.3-193"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2002-11-06-Speech-3-1942
lpv:speaker	lp:Emmanouil Mastorakis2
lpv:spokenAs	substitute; CONT (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3 member; PES (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 member; Delegation for relations with the countries of south-east Europe (2002-02-07--2004-07-19)3 member; Committee on Regional Policy, Transport and Tourism (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3 unknown; Panellinio Socialistiko Kinima (1999-07-20--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, ladies and gentlemen, I think that the final version of Mrs Schroedter's report, as adopted in committee, throws up some interesting views and proposals. I am thinking in particular of the extended partnership which the report supports in the form of tripartite contracts with the regions and Member States. I think this proposal is a daring move; it will make it easier to apply the principle of subsidiarity and cut out a lot of unwanted red tape. We should also be encouraged by the fact that the most efficient programmes have been those based on maximum participation. Any innovation, however, needs to be introduced carefully, under some sort of failsafe procedure, if we are to avoid rocking the boat and ensure that financial prudence under the Community budget is left well alone. I therefore think it would be advisable if the Commission were to fine tune this proposal, so that we can evaluate how and to what extent it can be implemented in the initial phase and then go on to examine application guidelines for it. We shall also have to monitor the implementation of this extended partnership closely, in tandem with the potential for decentralisation of each Member State, both old and new. I should also like to point out that, despite the simplifications and changes decided under Agenda 2000, there is still a serious take-up problem and appropriations are not turning into payments. So what do we conclude from all this? Do we need to keep simplifying procedures or is there perhaps a deep-seated structural problem which the Commission and Member States need to address? Has Community funding perhaps become so complicated that it no longer holds any attraction for investors? To close, may I point out that this matter deserves our serious attention, especially in the run up to enlargement, which will obviously exacerbate the take-up problem in that our new partners will also have to deal with difficulties caused by their lack of experience in applying the ."@en1
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata	"acquis communautaire"1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph