Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-03-09-Speech-3-338"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20050309.20.3-338"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Many thanks, Mr President. Ladies and gentlemen, there can be no doubt that the Natura 2000 programme is a cornerstone of the European Union’s efforts to protect biodiversity. The debate initiated by the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety in this House on the impact of the programme and how it should be financed is therefore extremely important.
The benefits derived by the public from this programme are indisputable. The most significant come under the heading of public health, yet it should not be forgotten that tourism has also been boosted and job opportunities created. It is estimated that 125 000 jobs have been created in the 15 old Member States alone. For a number of years, however, it has been apparent that developments in the Natura 2000 network in Europe have not been backed up by appropriate funding for the creation and maintenance of this network.
Admittedly, the European Commission has announced that it will adopt a strategic approach to financing the programme. What worries me, however, is that the proposal to cofinance the Natura 2000 network from various sources, for example the Rural Development Fund, the Structural Funds and LIFE+, the financial instrument for the environment, will make it impossible for the network to be implemented in a comprehensive, coherent and timely fashion. The fact that potential beneficiaries will need to apply for money from various funds will undoubtedly make it harder to obtain funding for specific protection measures. It will also become more difficult to monitor the implementation of the network at national level. According to the criteria currently used, certain areas do not qualify for funding under the various structural instruments. The latter have a number of different aims, which frequently relate to various types of land use, and sometimes even to specific regions.
Separate funding is therefore needed to ensure that the Natura 2000 network can be established. If this money is not safeguarded, there may be gaps in the network’s funding during the next Financial Perspective, which covers the period from 2007 to 2013, and this could mean that a large number of protective measures are not implemented. As an example, in my country, Poland, most of the land that is covered by the Natura 2000 programme does not qualify for the above-mentioned funds, either because the land is part of the national forests, or because it is not used for agriculture. It is for this reason that I hope that appropriate funding will be earmarked to support the establishment of the Natura 2000 network during work on the next Financial Perspective. I thank you."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples