Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-09-27-Speech-2-172"
Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
---|---|
rdf:type | |
dcterms:Date | |
dcterms:Is Part Of | |
dcterms:Language | |
lpv:document identification number |
"en.20050927.18.2-172"2
|
lpv:hasSubsequent | |
lpv:speaker | |
lpv:spoken text |
".
Mr President, that was an excellent debate on both reports and one to which I have listened carefully.
With regard to agriculture and fishing, some of your recommendations are already part of our legislative proposals, as some of you must know. On the reform of the organisation of the sugar market, the Commission's proposal takes account of the specific problems of the outermost regions. The Commission is convinced that the sugar sector in the outermost regions is expanding, also in the context of its contribution to energy security.
On the new agricultural fund, here, as you know, we have proposed maximum co-financing rates that are higher for the outermost regions, while the intervention areas have also been extended.
On bananas, you know how difficult the negotiations are for us, but I can assure you that the Commission will do its best to protect the interests of Community producers.
On fisheries, at the Council meeting of 21 June, the Commission declared that specific treatment was needed for this sector in the outermost regions. We have launched a study into this and will carefully examine the issue.
On competitiveness, your recommendations concerning the competitiveness of regions and the attention to be devoted to the development of human capital constitute the centrepiece of the draft Community strategic guidelines for the next generation of cohesion programmes.
In the area of research, we have introduced specific measures for the outermost regions in the draft seventh framework programme.
With regard to state aid, the latest proposal for the rules on national regional aid contains a number of positive measures in favour of the outermost regions. Those regions will be considered within the scope of Article 87(3)(a). They will also benefit from increased aid ceilings and will be able to authorise operating aid.
My door is always open to those who need further detailed information. I believe that, at a time when so many proposals affect the situation of the outermost regions or regions in general, constant cooperation and communication are a must for all of us.
With regard to Mr Guellec's report, I have taken note of the strong support in this House for the recommendations it puts forward: to consider territorial cohesion as a major element in the Lisbon and Gothenburg strategies; to give a boost to all dimensions of territorial cooperation; and to place greater emphasis on cooperation between urban centres, suburban areas and the countryside, particularly those with specific disadvantages, so as to contribute to the development of sustainable communities.
I am very pleased that we share many ideas. Let me respond to those few ideas on which I think we might have difficulty in finding a solution. First, with regard to the adoption of new territorial indicators, alongside GDP, to measure the development of regions and evaluate obstacles, I would remind you that there are no standardised and generally-accepted indicators in the field of territorial cohesion and, as you know, any new indicator needs to be accepted by Eurostat. There are currently only a small number of indicators available at regional level that have been harmonized: GDP, employment, unemployment and population data. Secondly, I agree that more work needs to be done in this area, but we must be realistic at this stage.
On the issue of establishing a system for assessing the impact of the various Community policies on territorial cohesion within the Union, it is true that current impact assessment does not take into account territorial cohesion issues. I agree that this question deserves further examination. I have taken note of your proposal to develop such a system through Espon and I will ask my services to analyse this. We will also discuss it with the Member States, which, as you know, cofinance this programme.
On your suggestion that a White Paper on territorial cohesion be drawn up by 2007, indicating in particular how this objective is to be incorporated in the national strategic plan of each Member State, you may remember that I raised the possibility of preparing a White Paper in order to promote territorial cohesion on the European agenda in the perspective of a ratified Constitution. That was done in Luxembourg in May.
I would like to remind you that in the strategic guidelines we asked Member States to pay particular attention to territorial issues when preparing their national development plans. These are already being drawn up and so, while I agree strongly with the added value that the White Paper would bring, we cannot wait for it in order to incorporate this dimension into the national strategic plans.
On Mr Margues' report, I have also noted a number of concerns and recommendations and I would like to respond to as many of them as I can in the time available to me.
Concerning the wider neighbourhood action plan, I fully agree that we have to strengthen the economic, social and cultural links between the outermost regions and their non-member neighbours. We have to take this forward on two fronts: first, trade and customs measures that would allow for the integration of markets in goods and services, as well as in trade-related fields; and second, the preferential agreements with non-Member countries. This mainly concerns the ACP countries through the European partnership agreements. These new agreements are to enter into effect as of January 2008. We are currently in the process of negotiations, but we are also examining the needs and interests of those regions, together with the Member States concerned.
I share your view that economic integration needs to be supported by exchanges of a social and cultural nature and cooperation in fields such as new technologies, health measures, combating illegal immigration and measures on the environment and risk prevention. I can also tell you that my services are currently exploring ways in which the Community financial instruments – not only the ERDF, but also the European Development Fund – can be used to strengthen the wider neighbourhood policy."@en1
|
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples