Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-07-06-Speech-3-199"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20050706.23.3-199"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
We feel that one of the key issues with regard to the current proposal for a regulation for the Cohesion Fund – already covered in the previous regulation – is the pegging of the Cohesion Fund to the Stability and Growth Pact, in other words, the possibility of suspending all or part of the financial aid from the Fund to cohesion countries, such as Portugal, if the decision provided for in Article 104(8) of the EC Treaty is adopted. The country concerned will thus be penalised twice over and the rapporteur’s proposal to make this a political decision by the Council, rather than an automatic decision, does not resolve the problem.
We are also opposed to the so-called ‘n+2’ rule being applied to the Cohesion Fund, which will place new restrictions on the use of these funds by countries that ought to be aiming to bring their levels of economic and social development up to the Community average.
We also consider the amounts earmarked for this Fund for 2007 to 2013 to be inadequate, particularly in light of the EU enlargement.
In view of the rejection of proposals that we tabled aimed at amending these and other measures that we felt were steps in the wrong direction, we voted against this resolution."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples