Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-12-13-Speech-2-439"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20051213.65.2-439"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
The provision of state aid is an issue that has long been the focus of attention in the European Union, for the reason that differences in approach and in the resources deployed by the various Member States have led to unfair competition, favouring some companies and distorting economic development across regions and even states of the European Union. Uncoordinated state aid has also distorted the Community’s basic objectives in the area of cohesion. It was therefore only natural that the Union should start to regulate state aid and that the bodies of the Community should increasingly strive, within the context of such experience, to develop a unified approach in this area.
When the opportunity came along of producing a report for the European Parliament on the Commission’s draft guidelines dealing with regional aid as a tool of regional development, I viewed it as an invitation to contribute towards improving the way the Community functions in this area. It is an area that attracts widespread attention not only because of the practice of providing significant cash injections for private companies, but also because of the way that taxpayers’ money is used for what may be seen as private purposes, albeit where there is a clear public interest.
The long process of negotiation between the Commission, the Council, Parliament and other interested parties, which eventually took a year despite the modest scope of the issue, provided confirmation of the complexities involved in the task of seeking to balance regulation in this area. In July of this year, the Commission presented the revised proposal which forms the basis of my current report and which itself is based on the second informal draft and on the previously mentioned negotiations. I can say that I broadly welcome the Commission’s decision to pursue a philosophy of providing less and better-targeted state aid, in fulfilment of the Barcelona and Gothenburg European Councils’ conclusions concerning reductions in the level of state aid and its focus on subjects of common interest, including economic and social cohesion.
Taking account also of the objectives of the Lisbon Strategy, I have concluded that the Commission’s interest is to provide clear support for the fulfilment of cohesion objectives. I say this because I am convinced that the provision of state aid and assistance programmes through structural funds are two complementary instruments for the EU to employ in pursuit of cohesion. That is why I think also that it is so important to support the Commission proposals for providing state aid under the process of convergence with EU standards to regions located mainly in the new Member States. It is fanciful to think that state aid can be properly regulated in the interests of fair economic competition without taking full account of all the aspects of cohesion.
In my original draft of the report I sought to emphasise the above-mentioned approach, along with the need for an equitable distribution of state aid throughout the whole of the EU. I also stressed that we must not neglect any region or sub-region where state aid is needed in order to achieve cohesion. My aim was to back those proposals that would make the Commission’s regional aid guidelines a real tool for the support of regional development. During the approval process I was happy to accept any amendment proposals that coincided with these aims, and that is why I supported the idea of including statistical regions in the category under Article 87(3)(a) for the provision of relevant state aid to all regions with natural handicaps or disadvantages that make it impossible for them to initiate development, or regions that have for various reasons fallen into the group of poor areas, as well as proposals restricting the destructive relocation of enterprises receiving state aid, and others. I was also happy to add proposals requesting that the criteria for determining the entitlement to state aid for individual regions and firms be defined as precisely as possible, and I expect the Commission to make a thorough assessment of the negative impacts of inappropriately provided aid and to draw the appropriate conclusions.
In my report, I fully supported the idea of taking regional factors into account in the horizontal guidelines for the provision of state aid. It will not be possible, however, to implement effectively all of the Commission’s well-intentioned proposals for the regional aid guidelines or the related recommendations from the European Parliament unless the procedures are simplified, which the Commission has to a large extent suggested as well. Implementation will also require complete transparency over the provision of state aid both at the national and European levels, including the integration of state aid for regional development into the national reference framework. The recommendations for integrating regional self-government into the process of state aid distribution, for the publication of all cases of state aid on the Internet, and for public access to the assessments of the implementation of state aid instruments for regional development carried out by the Commission will certainly contribute to this.
Madam President, I must say that the final text of my report differs somewhat from my expectations. Along with many fellow Members who participated in the creation of the final text, I have had to cut back my plans for an objective assessment of the Commission’s proposals. Some of the recommendations may go beyond the frame of reference defined in the principles set out by the Commission, but I trust that the Commission will examine all well-intended recommendations from Parliament.
Mr President, Madam President, Commissioner, honourable Members, the regions affected by poverty and inadequate development are looking to the guidelines we are proposing in the hope that they will contribute effectively to their development. Only then will they be able to say, along with all of us who are working for the successful advancement of the whole European Union together, that Community instruments are the right means for ensuring the welfare of all citizens of the Union."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples