Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2009-12-14-Speech-1-160"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20091214.18.1-160"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Thank you very much, Madam President, and I am also very grateful for this clarification, as it is vitally important that we are now going to talk about the microfinance facility. I would also like to welcome Commissioner Špidla to the following debate. Let me begin by saying that when I became rapporteur for this programme, I thought that I would have a very easy job, given the wide-ranging consensus and support on this issue, something which was also in evidence during the debate. This support was wide-ranging in many respects. On the one hand, as a crisis management facility, it will also help precisely those who are in the most desperate situation, who have lost their job and who cannot access credit or assistance either due to the financial crisis.
On the other hand, this is typically a facility which does not provide people with fish, but teaches them how to fish. It triggers precisely the type of creativity which we need most from the point of view of ensuring a positive outcome to the crisis. The third aspect which received, and still receives, wide-ranging support is the fact that the European Union’s resources are growing, which I think is the finance ministers’ dream. Some of the resources are being contributed by the European Investment Bank, while others are coming from other commercial banks as the European Union will be primarily covering the risk, thereby making it easier for the other participants to assume the risk.
As I have mentioned, there is wide support for the programme’s content. I think that, thanks to these aspects, the issue which provoked debate during the discussions with the Council and Commission was to do with which resources the European Union will use to finance this particular primary risk that has been assumed. The second point of contention was the extent of the resources which could help launch the facility and can be expected to actually attract other significant resources. The Council and Commission originally proposed that EUR 100 million should come from the Progress programme, which is primarily used to draw up policies for combating social exclusion and supporting equal opportunities.
We, for our part, said right from the start that the Progress programme cannot be jeopardised in any way since, during the current crisis, it is needed even more than before. It is also not acceptable for us to tinker with the Progress programme to such an extent that could really jeopardise it. Parliament was extremely willing to compromise during the debate. We also held three informal trialogues, one of which went on until the early hours, where we proposed that we could tinker with the Progress programme in any way that would not jeopardise its function. We suggested that, considering the original proposal, we could envisage launching the programme even with EUR 100 million rather than EUR 150 million.
Parliament’s 2010 draft budget found resources of EUR 25 million, which will enable it to launch the programme at the very start of 2010, and it was able to find these resources without touching the Progress programme in 2010. We also requested this item be removed from today’s agenda because we failed to reach agreement on it. Another matter we felt was an issue was that the Presidency arrived during the trialogue on all three occasions without any mandate, making it very difficult for it to consider our proposals properly.
I believe it is important for Parliament to vote as soon as possible on this matter, this very week even, so that this project can therefore be launched at the start of 2010 with a fund of EUR 100 million, because this conveys the message that this is a crisis management facility where speed is a particularly important consideration. I sincerely hope that Commissioner Špidla can help us get the Commission to withdraw its original proposal on diverting the EUR 100 million from the Progress programme so that this programme can be launched as soon as possible."@en1
|
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples