Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-12-19-Speech-4-123"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20021219.5.4-123"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Madam President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, mountain regions account for 30% of the surface area of the Community of Fifteen, and 10% of the population lives in mountain regions. Up to now, the European Union has viewed its policy on mountain regions as part of agricultural policy. I believe that this issue needs to be seen as a whole and not just sector by sector. Mountain regions account for over 50% of the total surface area of Member States such as Austria, Italy, Spain and Greece. For this reason it is absolutely essential, in addition to the issue of defining mountain regions, to consider the impact on various aspects of life, and for mountain regions to be seen as an area in which people live and not just as a business area for particular sectors of the economy.
I am delighted that the Commissioner has been able to inform us that a positive solution to the problem of creating a definition has now emerged. I think that in the final report to be presented in September 2003 this will provide us with a foundation on which we can build.
The suggestions that it is too soon to be specific about financial issues may reflect an unavoidable degree of caution, but it is certainly not very satisfactory, Commissioner. I myself come from a mountain region which is in a relatively good position by virtue of its autonomous status. We have had some degree of migration, but only a low percentage in recent years. However, mountain regions in Piedmont, Lombardy or the Veneto, for example, have been totally depopulated and have ultimately become back gardens for affluent areas in the big cities – and I am sure that are many similar examples in other EU Member States. If you consider those, it becomes clear how absolutely necessary it is to give those who have stayed on positive signals that changes are being made and that they will not have to wait for almost another decade. One possible measure would be for short-term changes to be introduced in competition policy. Classifying mountain regions as sensitive zones in the treaties would also give a strong signal with this in mind.
In my view, both Parliament and the Commission have treated policy on mountain regions rather shabbily. Up to now, we have only had three debates on this topic in this House, something that I regret, even though the Commission rounded off the International Year of Mountains by organising the conference you have already mentioned in an effort to form a picture of the situation and invite or listen to everyone involved in that Year. This conference was held in Brussels in October thanks to the efforts of Commissioners Fischler and Barnier. However, it would also certainly be advantageous if you could make a strong case to the Commission for it to take due account of the report on this subject adopted by the European Parliament on 9 September last year and to act accordingly.
By way of conclusion, let me briefly mention the Alpine Convention. The Commission has been completely inactive in this area. The picture you painted was not quite accurate. It is not so much the signatory states to the Alpine Convention that have not done their homework, as the Commission, which has signed only three protocols and for cost reasons has even stopped turning up to meetings. I think there is an urgent need for action here."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples