Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-03-17-Speech-5-038"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20000317.4.5-038"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, I would again like to thank the rapporteur, Maria Izquierdo Rojo, for an excellent and constructive report. There are two Commission documents that serve as a basis for the issue of grain legumes. The first is a report on the aid scheme in place for grain legumes, and the second a proposal for improved administration of the system. What vegetables are we actually talking about? I know that the Spanish members know the subject well, but I should mention that by grain legumes are meant three annual vegetables with a high protein content and which are gathered in the form of dry seeds. Lentils and chickpeas serve as food for humans, while the seeds of vetches, which to us are more unusual vegetables, are used as animal feed. Grain legumes are grown as field crops, particularly in the southern part of the Union, as they thrive well in dry climates. In fact Spain accounts for 90% of all EU grain legume production.
Grain legumes are not covered by the aid scheme that was remodelled with the Agenda 2000 programme, although they can be used in crop rotation schemes involving other crops such as corn. Grain legumes are covered by their own scheme where the amount of fixed aid per hectare is EUR 181 and the maximum guaranteed area is 400 000 hectares. The scheme was established in 1989 when the growing area of grain legumes was reduced at the expense of corn, which was already suffering from overproduction. The special scheme aimed to preserve traditional legume grain growing areas by means of the aid per hectare arrangement.
What are the conclusions of the Commission’s report? An examination of how the scheme has been applied reveals that the MGA of 400 000 hectares has been systematically exceeded. There are two conclusions to be drawn from this. First, the aim of the scheme has been successfully achieved and, second, the growing areas have to be brought under better control. The MGA overruns in the last few years have shown themselves to be mainly with regard to vetches. Although the scheme is being applied satisfactorily as a whole, MGA management is problematic, as those responsible for the overruns are not being treated any differently from other producers.
So how could the system be improved? We should aim to find solutions regarding improvements within the framework of the present scheme and the appropriations set aside for it. We are in a situation in which the Agenda 2000 reform has been adopted and international trade negotiations are drawing closer.
I would like to point out that the rapporteur’s proposed amendment whereby the current aid scheme for vetch farmers could be combined with another market arrangement, i.e., that for seed vetches, would not achieve the improvement desired. This is a reference to Amendment No 2. It cannot be adopted for two reasons: firstly, the schemes are mutually exclusive, as in one scheme the seeds, in principle, have to be harvested as animal feed, while, in the other, they are designated for sowing. The other reason is that it might involve extra expense.
The Commission’s report recommends that the MGA should be divided into two parts based on the earlier land area division in the proportion 40/60. It would divide up thus: 1 600 000 hectares would be used for the production of lentils and chickpeas, and 240 000 hectares would be used for the production of vetches. In addition, it is proposed that the Management Committee for Dried Fodder be replaced by the Management Committee for Cereals. The purpose of this change is only to legally endorse what has become common practice on the committees.
Finally, I would like to say that the Commission will adopt the rapporteur’s amendments that reinforce its position, proposing that the Commission submit a new report, as in Amendment No 3, and seek ways of improving the system, as in Amendment No 1.
Members of the European Parliament, in the light of my comments, the proposal will probably not be difficult to adopt so that it can be applied from the marketing year 2000 – 2001 onwards."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples