Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-05-17-Speech-3-354"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20060517.23.3-354"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, first I want to thank the rappporteur, Mr Elles, for a very constructive report concerning the Commission’s annual policy strategy. It clearly sets out those priorities that Parliament has identified and advocated in the negotiations on the financial framework. My group wishes to stress in particular the importance of unhindered traffic in the workings of the internal market, and for that reason it has tabled two amendments.
The EU’s greatest challenge is reducing unemployment. That is why programmes which promote growth and employment are very important. These are, in particular, the Seventh Framework Programme, which concerns research and development, and the Competitiveness and Innovation Programme for small and medium-sized enterprises. They should be quickly brought to completion.
Structural and cohesion policy will be among the major challenges facing the EU in the forthcoming programming period. Considerable sums have been set aside for these in the financial framework, especially for the new Member States. It is important that these funds are used. That is why the programmes must be made ready quickly and efficiently. Ideally, they should be adopted some time this year, but in any case no later than next year, otherwise the funds that have been granted will remain unspent, as they were in the first few years of the Agenda 2000 programming period. That delayed the implementation of projects and at the same time caused a considerable backlog of outstanding commitments, which has still not been cleared.
Parliament needs to prepare for the mid-term review of the multiannual financial framework and the agricultural reform in good time. In this connection, the subject of compulsory cofinancing of direct agricultural aid must be clearly raised. That would reduce the EU’s budgetary expenditure, even out the differences in the Member States’ net contributions, increase Member States’ responsibility for spending funds and do more to safeguard the livelihood of farmers within the context of the current ceiling for expenditure. Our group supports this. With these observations we are prepared to give the report our support."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples