I believe that the Leader programme has in the main been successful and it should be developed to achieve more at local level.

The Leader Programme is just one area that comes to my mind.

I mention, in particular, those under the Leader Programme.

Still on the Leader programme, we are told that, with the reformed financing, the actions under it will be funded through Objective 2.

To begin with we would like to see more money being set aside for the LEADER programme.

I give the example of the LEADER programme.

What has happened in Hungary concerning the LEADER programme is quite shocking.

As a general point, I should add that accumulating aid is not in itself a condition for the implementation of the LEADER programme.

It must be stressed that in order to become eligible under the LEADER programme, local operators have combined forces, debated and prepared projects.

I would like to see a variety of policies that are based more on programmes such as the Leader programme - I know it is going to be retained and strengthened.

I am referring to the LEADER programme and the SAPARD programme.

It is also clear that cofinancing is required and that this cofinancing must be provided in accordance with the regulations governing the LEADER programme.

I would also like to highlight the LEADER programme in this context, which contributes to improving the involvement of women in the decision-making process in the local action groups.

What was being asked for at the time was both a Community subsidy under the LEADER programme and, in addition, Community co-financing under a Community support programme.

I therefore emphasize that the Community initiatives should be taken into better account - and I am thinking in particular of the Leader programme - in terms of their practical implementation on the ground.

The Leader programme at its core affords an opportunity for public, private and voluntary groups to pool their collective talents so as to create long-term and sustainable jobs in small and medium-sized enterprises in rural areas.

It was also supposed to bring about the rural population's active involvement in the design and planning of that development, which we in the Member States are already financing through the 'second pillar' and the Leader programme.

In addition, with regard to the LEADER programme, the Commission’s proposal establishing a reserve fund for countries with lower spending levels, in order to enhance and reward the best projects, should be kept.

Women should also play an important role in the LEADER Programme, where they should bring in their specific interests and their specific potential in order to mobilise the development potential of an area.

It also addresses the challenge of providing alternative fuel resources which is a land-based enterprise, and also the importance of adjusting the SMEs to meet local needs and in particular initiatives such as the LEADER programme.

By analogy we already have at the moment within the European Community initiatives like the Leader programme and the Urban programme where this bottom-up approach has been proven to be successful, and has resolved some of the problems that have been faced.

Hence my plea to you to negotiate it again with great precision, in order to find room in SAPARD for your demand for more information along the lines of the LEADER programme to be made available for rural areas.

It is also worth making special mention here of the intention to support the competitiveness of Member States' border regions in the context of the forthcoming enlargement, as well as extending the benefits of the Leader programme to cover the future Member States.

Mr President, I voted for the Procacci report on rural development, not only because I endorse the major policy lines of the LEADER programme, but also because it complements the URBAN programme, which I spoke about earlier.

If the rural pillar of the CAP is to become a reality we need some continued form of the LEADER programme after 2000 to maintain thriving rural communities, particularly in areas no longer covered either by Objective 1 or Objective 5(b) after 1999.