Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-05-15-Speech-1-065"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20000515.4.1-065"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, we agree with the objectives pursued in the Commission’s proposal on the new regulation on flax and hemp: to regulate and balance the markets, simplify the common agricultural policy and prevent fraud. However, we do not agree with the chosen method. This is because we consider that this proposal, since the amendments improving it, which were presented by the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development, have not been accepted, may lead to the total disappearance of hemp and flax crops in small- and medium-sized holdings, and as an alternative crop in certain areas of the Union.
We believe, Commissioner, that it is unacceptable that, in order to put an end to fraud, we should seek to end cultivation within a certain sector. This is a good time to point out that the best way to combat fraud is through the total transparency of public aid and of the investigations into fraud that are under way, and publishing the names of fraudsters, as the only way of preventing all farmers and the whole of the sector from having to pay for the consequences of fraud on the part of a few speculators.
The inclusion of flax and hemp within the general regulations on herbaceous plants requires the establishment of a single yield for all areas of the European Union. The existence of different yields in northern and southern areas, in the different regions of the Union, may lead to real discrimination in payments per surface area with regard to this crop. Therefore, we request that the inclusion of an average yield be accepted for all regions of the Union, and that this be the average yield for cereals.
With regard to aid for processing, we feel that it is completely inappropriate that there should be transitional aid for the processing of short-fibre flax, as the Commission proposes, which would end in 2006. We believe that it should be long-term aid and that it should be brought into line with the aid for the processing of long-fibre flax, which is the only way of guaranteeing the commercial production of short-fibre flax in an industrial sector which provides a genuine alternative to synthetic products.
Commissioner, we are in complete agreement on the need for stabilisers with regard to this crop, but we completely disagree with the national guaranteed quantities established in the Commission’s proposal, since we feel that they are absolutely inadequate and represent quite the opposite of the actual situation in each of the countries. We therefore also ask you to consider the proposal presented by the Committee on Agriculture.
Lastly, we absolutely agree with the existence of controls in this sector. Therefore, the existence, in every single case, of the sales contract between the farmer and the processor, seems to us to be essential. We are therefore voting against the report with regard to the disappearance of these contracts. The existence of a contract is the best way of proving that the crop has been sold and processed."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples