Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-09-03-Speech-3-268"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20030903.10.3-268"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
".
The contribution by Mr Khanbhai corresponds to Mrs Sanders-ten Holte's remarks about the wish of Parliament to be involved in anything relating to the Water Initiative and the Water Fund. This is not difficult to understand. The money we are talking about is part of the EDF. We are working to set the budget for the EDF. The Commission and Parliament are in full agreement on this, also for very principled reasons.
We want a special facility or fund in order to have a more flexible instrument, more ability to work across the board. There is no reason for the worry expressed in the report by Mr Lannoye about the 0.3% management of the fund. This is not an attempt to create one solution. It is more like a facility. It does not matter if we use the word 'fund'. The main idea is to be able to accelerate actions as necessary and to be a catalyst for the various partnerships that it is possible to create and promote. We are not talking about a conventional method of funding projects, but something that could accelerate things.
We hope that this debate and the welcome support from Parliament will make it possible for Member States to accept what we have proposed. To be direct, this is about eliminating the risk of losing EUR 1 billion of the EUR 13.5 billion reserved in the 9th European Development Fund which is up for evaluation next year. That money was made conditional some years ago, under the Cotonou Agreement and the 9th EDF, on the performance in the first part of the period. This is a totally political judgement. This is why we came up with the idea of reserving this money for the Water Initiative, in order to make sure that we all agree on this high-priority dossier and reserve the money for it so as to more or less lift this EUR 1 billion out of the general discussion. That is what we are trying to do. I hope that support from Parliament on this will muster enthusiasm among Member States.
Regarding the trade aspect of the discussion, I agree with Mr Belder about the very difficult situation in terms of coffee. It is ironic that we urged developing countries to diversify and pointed out that coffee was a good cash crop. The result is that now, Vietnam and many other developing countries are quite successfully moving into coffee production, consequently dumping it on the market, and damaging the market to such an extent that we have a crisis that is very difficult to deal with. There is no easy answer to that. The reality of the market is here to stay."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples