Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2006-05-31-Speech-3-217"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20060531.20.3-217"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
".
Mr President, I should like to express my gratitude to the Committee on Culture and Education, in particular to Mrs Hennicot-Schoepges, and to the other committees involved, for all the valuable comments on and amendments to the Commission’s proposal concerning the European Year of Intercultural Dialogue.
I am very glad that the European Parliament shares the Commission’s view on the importance of intercultural dialogue and the priority it should be given in the European Union.
The Commission welcomes the majority of the amendments. The Commission is particularly sensitive to the call for strong cooperation with civil society and to the emphasis on the role of education. We also applaud the emphasis on the contribution of different cultures and expressions of diversity to the heritage of the Member States, as well as to European identity. We are very much in favour of ensuring continuity with the European Year of Equal Opportunities For All in 2007. The Commission is also in favour of a reference – preferably in a recital – to the fact that intercultural dialogue embraces dimensions related to religions and beliefs.
However, the Commission would like to express some concerns relating to a couple of the amendments. Firstly, we cannot subscribe to limiting the resources for the communication and information campaign to EUR 2 million. Experience gained from previous European Years shows that these campaigns are crucial for achieving the awareness-raising objectives, and evaluation reports have always pointed to scarcity of resources as an issue in this respect. The Commission could show some flexibility vis-à-vis its original proposal of a EUR 4.5 million budget, but certainly not on such a drastic cut.
Another financial issue is the level of co-financing of the actions at national level, which an amendment proposes to increase to up to 80%. As already stated, due to the limited budget of the Year, this change would significantly reduce the number of events that could be co-financed, as well as the commitment of partners at national level. The original proposal for 50% cofinancing is the standard formula which has been retained for all previous European Years.
A number of amendments introduce a discrepancy between the geographical scope of the Year, which is limited to the European Union, and some new objectives and actions to be carried out with respect to third countries. The Commission proposed to concentrate the specific instrument on the Year of Intercultural Dialogue within the European Union, while committing itself to developing a parallel effort for the dialogue in, and with, third countries on the basis of external relations instruments.
Some amendments include problematic references to several very concrete actions. The Commission is of the opinion that the Year should be a bottom-up process, where projects and initiatives come from our partners, in particular from civil society. Given the limited number of initiatives which can be supported, the introduction of references to precise actions within the legal basis would hamper the creativity of our partners and lead to implementation difficulties.
Last, but not least, the Commission understands and appreciates the will of the European Parliament to be closely associated with the process. Unfortunately, it cannot support the amendment suggesting the participation of representatives of the European Parliament in the Advisory Committee. Comitology is a highly codified matter. It is our wish to adhere to the existing rules. Thank you for your attention."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples