Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-05-17-Speech-3-145"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20060517.16.3-145"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
In June 2005, Parliament estimated that the Union required a budget of EUR 974 billion in order to face up to the challenges of the future. The agreement on the financial perspective, which was reached on 4 April at the end of the trialogue between Parliament, the Commission and the Council, is EUR 112 billion below our position in June 2005. We have recorded a 35% decrease in the budgetary resources allocated to growth and competitiveness (heading 1a), a 10% decrease for the Structural Funds and the Cohesion Fund (heading 1b) and so on. With such a tight budget, it is very hard to imagine the Union’s being able to achieve the Lisbon and Gothenburg objectives. This is a minimalist agreement that does not provide the Union with sufficient leeway to conduct new policies for the future.
The only thing going for this financial perspective is the fact that it exists. We can no longer postpone our vote for fear of not being able to start the new programming period in time. The Member States and the regions must, in particular, be able to develop and launch their projects in good time so that the latter can be cofinanced as from 2007. It would, in fact, be tragic if the poorest regions in Europe were unable to have access to structural aid as from 2007.
Those are the reasons justifying my abstention."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples