Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2009-03-24-Speech-2-035"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2009-03-24"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Green Paper on territorial cohesion and debate on the future reform of the cohesion policy - Regional policy best practice and obstacles to use of Structural Funds - Urban dimension of cohesion policy - Complementarities and coordination of cohesion policy with rural development measures - Implementation of the Structural Funds Regulation 2007-2013: results of negotiations on national cohesion strategies and operational programmes - A European initiative for the development of micro-credit in support of growth and employment (debate)2
dcterms:Language	"de"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20090324.3.2-035"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2009-03-24-Speech-2-0362
lpv:speaker	lp:Markus Pieper2
lpv:spokenAs	unknown; Christlich Demokratische Union Deutschlands (2004-07-20--2009-07-13)3 substitute; AGRI (2007-01-31--2009-07-13)3 member; Delegation to the EU-Kazakhstan, EU-Kyrgyzstan and EU-Uzbekistan Parliamentary Cooperation Committees, and for relations with Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Mongolia (2006-07-03--2009-07-13)3 substitute; Delegation for relations with Australia and New Zealand (2007-03-14--2009-07-13)3 member; EPP-ED (2004-07-20--2009-07-13)3 member; REGI (2007-01-31--2009-07-13)3
lpv:translated text	"Madam President, ladies and gentlemen, I am happy to take this opportunity to consider the Roszkowski report in more detail. Both policy areas covered by the report – the Structural Funds and the support for rural areas – seem to be working well. However, I have the impression that in some cases both of these policies have identical objectives. In the areas of demographics, energy and telecommunications, we find projects funded both by the Structural Funds and by the rural development policy, which are working towards the same goals, but are the responsibility of different ministries. We have a large number of European projects, but do we also have projects which provide European added value? My impression is that there is sometimes a failure to see the big picture. If we were to link together projects across the different departments, we would be able to achieve much more for the rural areas, such as decentralised energy infrastructures, broadband cabling over a much larger area and cross-border water infrastructures. We need more projects which are supported by several ministries at once. If this happens, we will no longer be working on a small scale, but instead we will be able to introduce permanent improvements in the regions using European funding. We must make the European requirements for cross-departmental cooperation binding. Perhaps we should even seriously consider setting a minimum project amount. One more comment on financing: in my opinion, modulation is not a nice word. It takes away the compensation payments which have been promised to farmers, without providing the rural development programmes with reliable funding. For this reason, agricultural policy must in future be a policy for farmers with clear financial commitments and no transfer of funds elsewhere. In the same way, regional policy must be a policy for the regions, with a particular focus on rural regions and their requirements. This will result in true European initiatives which will improve our regions in the long term."@en1
lpv:videoURI	<go to Events_and_structure europarl>2

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph