Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2010-02-09-Speech-2-326"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20100209.16.2-326"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Mr President, the proposal we are debating today is a tangible sign of the commitment of all EU institutions to promote integration of extremely marginalised and deprived communities into mainstream society. The proposal meets the request of Parliament and of the Council and confirms that the Structural Funds have a role to play, not only by contributing financially but also by promoting an integrated approach to tackling social and economic conditions of marginalised communities.
The proposal specifically targets the Roma population which, in Europe, accounts for 10 million people. However, in accordance with the common basic principles on Roma inclusion, the proposal does not exclude other marginalised groups sharing similar social economic circumstances.
The current compromise proposal extends housing interventions for marginalised communities to all 27 Member States and not only to the EU-12 as the Commission initially proposed. The existing Article 7 applies only to housing interventions in urban areas, while the amendment proposes that housing interventions also be allowed in rural areas. This extension is justified since the majority of the Roma population in the EU-12 is settled in rural and not in urban areas.
Under the proposed amendment, both the renovation of existing housing and the construction of new houses are eligible. In fact, renovation of houses of extremely poor quality might result in a waste of public resources. During the discussion of the proposal, the Committee on Regional Development asked for a specific reference to desegregation measures. Recital 6 of the proposal now includes such desegregation measures as examples of actions which should go along with housing interventions. Indeed, segregated settlements imply insecurity, no easy access to education or employment, as well as exposure to violent attacks and criminality. The creation of new marginalised areas, although with decent and ERDF-supported houses, is definitively not our objective.
We know that many Member States have put in place integration policies of the Roma communities with particular focus on housing. The implementation of these policies is not an easy task. The Structural Funds can participate in this effort, supporting not only housing but more importantly actions improving the productive capacities of these communities, such as support for SMEs, women, entrepreneurship initiatives, etc.
In this respect, I would like to stress that the main objective of the cohesion policy is to make the regional economies converge by fostering the productive capacities.
As you are certainly aware, the new regulation will be accompanied by a declaration from the Commission – and indeed most Member States – stating that the eligibility of housing interventions in favour of marginalised communities throughout the European Union under the ERDF is of an exceptional nature. This exception should in no way be regarded as a general opening of cohesion policy to financing housing interventions.
I would like now to refer to the proposal by the Committee on Regional Development to insert a specific recital on comitology into the text. In this context, I would like to remind you that a horizontal solution of transitional provisions relating to comitology has, in principle, been found between the three institutions. The aim of the Declaration of the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission concerning the implementation of Article 291 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union is to avoid raising institutional discussions on each individual file during the interim period pending the entry into force of a new comitology framework regulation. The Commission therefore regrets the introduction of the recital, but will not block – for this reason – the agreement in first reading between the colegislators.
I am looking forward to the debate."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata | |
| lpv:videoURI |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples