Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-05-15-Speech-1-067"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20000515.4.1-067"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
"Mr President, I am pleased to have this opportunity to address Parliament on this very important issue. The main thing to stress is that misuse of funds in one place should not prevent innovation continuing in other areas. Excellent schemes are already being developed and should be supported.
In an unstable agricultural industry, the opportunities offered by flax and hemp in a developing market for natural fibres should not be lost. It will provide farmers with the opportunity to diversify – something that they have continually been urged to do by respective Member State governments and by the European Parliament – to produce new employment possibilities. In my own nation, Wales, flax processing plants are already being established using European Union aid. The report from our Agricultural Committee also includes amendments to extend grant aid for producing flax and hemp to non-arable land, thus providing opportunities to diversify areas of the European Union unable to obtain monetary support under the present regime.
This is a crucial matter as it affects thousands of hectares of European land with low productive possibilities. For example, 80% of the land mass of my nation, Wales, is non-arable. The higher than average incidence of rainfall there makes it ideal terrain for growing short-fibre flax and yet it could not apply for European Union support under prior regulations. Its peripheral location, something which has already been stressed here from other areas, and its small family farm units having to compete in a wider market, coupled with the high value of sterling, has meant that it has lost 80% of its income in less than three years. The importance of flax production being subsidised in such areas of the European Union cannot be overemphasised. I would like to thank the rapporteur for accepting our amendments in this regard.
We also reject quotas and a ceiling for this production, as this would limit the possibilities to develop diversification and employment possibilities in disadvantaged regions. We also believe there should be a balance of support between farmers and processors. The rapporteur, Mrs Schierhuber, has agreed to put a limit of EUR 600 per hectare to farmers directly, provided that the farmer proves to the competent authorities, within 18 months after having applied for the subsidy, that he has delivered the fibre to a processor. We also agreed if this proof could not be provided to the competent authorities within that period, the subsidy should stay at the level of the premia for set-aside land.
I congratulate the rapporteur and call on the European Parliament to support the Agriculture Committee's report."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples