Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-05-15-Speech-1-074"

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	"de"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20000515.4.1-074"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2000-05-15-Speech-1-0752
lpv:speaker	lp:Friedrich-Wilhelm Graefe zu Baringdorf2
lpv:spokenAs	substitute; BUDG (1999-07-22--2002-01-14)3 member; Delegation for relations with South Africa (1999-09-28--2002-01-14)3 member; Conference of Committee Chairs (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 chair; AGRI (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 member; G/EFA (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 unknown; Bündnis 90/die Grünen (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, Commissioner Fischler, the Commission appears to have made a sound proposal, but in actual fact, this is not a sound proposal. It may possibly prevent fraud because there is no longer an incentive for farmers to pocket the higher flax premium instead of set-aside or cereals premiums. The only problem is that if you cut the flax premium to the level of the cereals premium and the set-aside premium, then no more flax or hemp will be cultivated in the EU and that will be that. But if you introduce processing aid, where, in your view, fraud cannot be committed – and incidentally it can actually, but let us assume for now that it cannot – then the result might be that the raw material is grown outside the EU and imported. If we want to ensure that flax is cultivated here, then we need to do precisely what we have proposed here, what the rapporteur has proposed, namely to go back to the level of the cereals premium. When proof is then furnished that processing has taken place the amount is doubled, and this proof will not require very many checks because it has to be provided by those who wish to have this premium. I should like to make the following comment on the maximum quantities: the fact that the budget has expanded because of fraud – and here the Commission has not distinguished itself in terms of controls – is not something of which we can approve. Obviously, we have to push back the tide of fraud and the money which has been lost because of fraud needs, of course, to be traced. But the overall budget for this important, environmentally-friendly crop needs to be increased, and that is why the quotas which are now being laid down are inappropriate. Mr Fischler, I am curious to hear whether you are going to accept the proposals made by the rapporteur – and I should like to thank her for her report. You know what procedure this is. If you say that you cannot accept them, we will react tomorrow and then we will have to negotiate this sound proposal from the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development at another level."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph