Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-05-15-Speech-1-069"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2000-05-15"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Flax and hemp for fibre2
dcterms:Language	"nl"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20000515.4.1-069"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2000-05-15-Speech-1-0702
lpv:speaker	lp:Rijk van Dam2
lpv:spokenAs	member; EDD (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 substitute; AFCO (1999-07-21--2000-06-12)3 vice-chair; Committee on Regional Policy, Transport and Tourism (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 member; Delegation to the EU-Estonia Joint Parliamentary Committee (1999-09-28--2002-01-14)3 member; Delegation for relations with Israel (1999-09-28--2002-01-14)3 unknown; Staatkundig Gereformeerde Partij - Gereformeerd Politiek Verbond - Reformatorisch Politieke Federatie (1999-07-20--2002-03-17)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, over the past couple of years, we have seen a sharp increase in the acreage of fibre flax and hemp as a result of subsidy-hunting in Member States such as Great Britain and Spain. Producers in those countries destroyed their harvest, whilst they pocketed the subsidies for the crops. It is only right that the Council clamped down on this type of misuse of Community funding by amending the flax regulation. The original objective of production support was to bolster the traditional fibre flax crops which are mainly grown in Belgium, France and the Netherlands. It is vital not to lose sight of this objective. We therefore reject the proposal that the Committee on Budgets outlined in its opinion, namely to pitch the support granted to short- and long-fibre flax at the same level. The production costs for long-fibre flax are higher than those for short-fibre flax and for hemp. It is precisely with the short-fibre variant that farmers fiddled the system. We can go along with the proposal to bring the cultivation of flax under the general support regulation for arable crops. But the cereal support level is too low for long-fibre flax and therefore acts as a disincentive to producers to grow this flax variant. This is why we have made our approval of this report dependent upon whether the support level for producers of long-fibre flax will be double that for cereal. As long as support for processors continues to be varied according to whether the crop concerned is short- or long-fibre, we can do away with this differentiation in the support for producers. An increase in support should, however, be accompanied by the following three control measures. Firstly, a compulsory contract with processors who, in turn, must prove that the flax has been processed. Secondly, a certain quota per Member State, shared between long-fibre and short-fibre flax and hemp. Thirdly, the use of certified seed. Finally, I would point out that, as it is late in the season, this regulation will not be able to come into force until the 2000-2001 season."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph