Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-10-24-Speech-1-065"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20051024.14.1-065"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, Commissioner, we ought perhaps to rename the ‘lifelong learning’ programme ‘learning throughout life’, for ‘lifelong’ has the ring of punishment about it, and learning should, after all, be a joy.
Although this programme is an educational one whose components – Comenius, Erasmus, Grundtvig and so on – address different priorities, the one thing these all have in common is that they promote mobility, and enhance quality, giving recognition for achievement and education, for multilingualism and knowledge of other countries. In so doing, they add value to Europe. These things are precisely what we need to achieve – or at least to get closer to – the Lisbon objective by 2010, that being to have 3 million Erasmus students and 150 000 Leonardo participants.
While I agree with Mrs Pack that the grant for Erasmus students needs to be increased, that must not result in those Member States that top up scholarships from national funds – as Austria does, for example – reducing their contributions; on the contrary, they should adapt to the new requirements. In the EU, 25% of the population have a university degree, and 75% a certificate of completed secondary education. Many of the citizens have completed vocational training, although it is unfortunate – and something I wish to criticise now – that the Lisbon documents include no figures on them. Mobility at work or in the course of initial training involves many administrative and linguistic obstacles, and so the Leonardo programme urgently needs more support and promotion; what is needed is not a new Erasmus programme for trainees, but a Leonardo programme that works properly, and if it is to do that, more funding needs to be provided.
We are waiting in eager anticipation for the individual Member States’ Lisbon action plans, while being no less eager to find out what is in the Financial Perspective and the budget proposals for all these programmes for 2007. What is clear is that it would be a disaster for the students, school pupils, teachers, and trainees, just as much as for cultural organisations, artists and young people if the beginning of the new generations of programmes were to be delayed; it would also be in flagrant contradiction to the Lisbon Strategy."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples