Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2004-04-20-Speech-2-267"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2004-04-20"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Third report on economic and social cohesion2
dcterms:Language	"es"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20040420.10.2-267"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2004-04-20-Speech-2-2682
lpv:speaker	lp:Juan de Dios Izquierdo Collado2
lpv:spokenAs	member; PES (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 member; Committee on Regional Policy, Transport and Tourism (2002-01-17--2004-07-19)3 member; Delegation for relations with the Palestinian Legislative Council (2002-02-07--2004-07-19)3 member; Temporary committee on improving safety at sea (2004-03-08--2004-04-21)3 substitute; BUDG (2002-02-06--2004-07-19)3 unknown; Partido Socialista Obrero Español (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, I have a high regard for Mr Barnier, as does the whole of my group. We value his work greatly. I should like this to go on record. I therefore formally endorse the statements made by previous speakers. Essentially, we agree with the basic approach drafted by the Commission further to Mr Barnier’s proposal. We agree with the minimum 0.45% for the three objectives. We agree with bringing Lisbon-Gothenburg and employment under cohesion. We also agree to the College of Commissioners’ 1.24% proposal. The rapporteur represents the Committee on Regional Policy, Transport and Tourism. It is regrettable that he is not prepared to defend the 1.24% proposed by the Commission. Our proposal is therefore lower than the proposal made by the College of Commissioners. I find this most disappointing. I simply cannot understand why this is the case, when we tabled so many amendments on this subject. There is agreement in principle with the Commission’s proposal. I should like to emphasise two key issues. The first concerns the ultra-peripheral regions. It is important to try to ensure these regions retain substantial aid, regardless of their per capita income. Seventy-five on mainland Europe does not mean the same as 75% at a distance of 3 000 km from the mainland. Finally, I should like to emphasise how important it is for this House to stand up for fair criteria. A case in point is the need to ensure that the statistical effect does not have a negative impact on any institution in receipt of European funding. We have argued this strongly. Indeed the College of Commissioners made a proposal along these lines for the regions. Parliament has no objections. Anyone who maintains the opposite is not speaking the truth and is sending out the message that the statistical effect cannot affect Member States reducing the Cohesion Fund either. I know of one country at 83% of average income. This is set to change to 92% because of the statistical effect. The limit is 90%. I urge you to be flexible between now and when the vote is taken, Mr Hatzidakis."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph