Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2011-06-23-Speech-4-066-000"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2011-06-23"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:5th cohesion report and strategy for the post-2013 cohesion policy - Implementation of cohesion policy programmes for 2007-2013 - European urban agenda and its future in cohesion policy - Objective 3: future agenda for cross-border, transnational and interregional cooperation - Increased effectiveness between ERDF and other structural funds (debate)2
dcterms:Language	"fr"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20110623.5.4-066-000"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2011-06-23-Speech-4-067-0002
lpv:speaker	lp:Elie Hoarau2
lpv:spokenAs	substitute; Delegation for relations with India (2009-09-16--2012-01-03)3 member; REGI (2009-07-16--2012-01-03)3 vice-chair; Delegation to the ACP-EU Joint Parliamentary Assembly (2009-09-17--2012-01-03)3 unknown; Parti communiste réunionnais (2009-08-19--2012-01-03)3 member; EUL/NGL (2009-07-14--2012-01-03)3 substitute; JURI (2009-07-16--2012-01-03)3
lpv:translated text	"Madam President, I would say that, among the most disadvantaged regions of the European Union are the outermost regions which, as well as lagging behind, combine permanent disadvantages, such as remoteness, smaller markets, insularity and vulnerability to the vagaries of the weather. It is a good job that the fifth report on cohesion has reaffirmed for these regions a specific and special treatment, in accordance with Article 349 of the Treaty of Lisbon. The report also requires that the funds earmarked for them after 2013 be at least equal to those they are receiving in the current programming period. As for creating an intermediate category for regions whose GDP is between 75 and 90% of average European GDP, I am in agreement, provided a double condition is met. Firstly that Objective 1 funds, for the convergence regions, not be reduced – I would even like to see them increased – by the savings made as a result of certain regions no longer being under Objective 1. These savings must benefit the new intermediary regions of course, but also the other regions. The second condition is that this creation be at least as favourable as the phasing-out process for the regions concerned. Finally, cohesion policy is one of solidarity and redistribution, to enable regions to get up to speed and to catch up. It cannot replace any other strategy like, for instance, Europe 2020, which should have its own funding, separate from the cohesion funding, even if these two policies must naturally be coordinated and harmonised. It is for this reason that our group, for instance, is opposed to the European Social Fund being separated from cohesion policy."@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