Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-02-15-Speech-4-046"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20010215.3.4-046"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, ladies and gentlemen, first of all I should like to thank you, Mrs Izquierdo Rojo, for your report and to express my thanks to everyone else for the time and effort they have put into the 22 amendments. Before I deal with these, allow me to say a few brief words on the basic principles that underlie our proposal. The present regime for nuts and locust beans has been in place for ten years, and the first quality-improvement plans expired in the year 2000. During this ten-year period, 92 producers’ organisations have been awarded a total of EUR 750 million in Community funding to improve the production and marketing of nuts and locust beans.
Successful restructuring has indeed been effected in some cases, and producers have become more competitive. As a result, they are generally in a stronger position than they used to be when it comes to securing markets for their goods and competing successfully with suppliers from countries outside the EU.
An amount of EUR 250 million is earmarked once again for the agreements and measures that are still in force. The Commission believes that the ten-year plan has, in principle, adequately achieved the goal that was set ten years ago, namely the creation of a stable basis for economically viable producer organisations. The Council, however, asked the Commission to propose the continuation of the payments to nut and locust bean producers in the 2001 financial year. This was the basis on which the Commission drew up its proposal. Your amendments show that this proposal does not go far enough for your liking. The amendments, some of which refer to resolutions adopted by the European Parliament in June and October of last year, chiefly relate to three areas.
One group of amendments, comprising Nos 14, 15, 17 and 20, seeks to maintain the aid for quality and marketing-improvement plans beyond the year 2001 and to treat as eligible expenditure all money spent on work that is carried out by the end of 2002. Amendments Nos 10 and 11 refer to the modest level of funds required for this purpose. The purpose of the second group of amendments, comprising Nos 8 and 18, is to maintain the special aid for hazelnuts through to the end of 2002.
Both groups of amendments are at least partly motivated by a perceived need to protect EU producers from imports. As far as these amendments are concerned, let me make the following points: firstly, the framework of this proposal is confined to the funding of programmes under the budget for 2001. It was never meant to be extended to the 2002 financial year, because that would entail additional costs amounting to EUR 82 million. Secondly, specific aid for hazelnuts is not covered by the proposal. Its inclusion would generate a further EUR 110 million in additional budgetary expenditure over and above the cost of the present proposal, which is assessed at EUR 24 million. Amendment No 16, which deals with chestnuts, does not fall within the scope of the regime we are debating here.
The third group of amendments, comprising Nos 6, 7, 12, 13, 21 and 22, are designed to secure the long-term future of nut and locust bean production by means of other support measures. In addition, Amendments Nos 9 and 19 propose the continuation of support within the framework of the Common Organisation of the Market and of Regulation (EC) No 2200/96. With regard to this third group, allow me to tell you how the Commission sees the future of this area of economic activity and the support it should receive. If we consider the present situation with regard to the production of nuts and locust beans, we see, on the one hand, economically viable and very definitely competitive producer organisations, which are, in a manner of speaking, the Union’s flagship producers. It is they who grow new varieties and who use modern production and marketing methods. These producers have made good use of the money we have provided over the past ten years and a number of them will surely also be able to benefit from the extension that is under discussion today. On the other hand, unfortunately, there are also producers and producer organisations that have to operate in extremely difficult conditions – in disadvantaged areas, for instance, many of which are in remote mountainous regions – with no irrigation facilities. In these areas there are literally thousands of families who remain partly or totally dependent on nut and/or locust bean production for their livelihood.
On account of the natural disadvantages that their geographical location imposes on all of these producers, they will always find it difficult to compete with importers from countries outside the EU. For this reason, we believe it makes far more sense – and this, indeed, is one of the aims we set ourselves in 1999 – to support this latter group of producers, whose problems are primarily of a social nature, in the framework of rural development. That is why we built this second pillar of the common agricultural policy, and so it is right to make use of it in this context. In accordance with the principle of subsidiarity, responsibility for rural development has also been shifted to the Member States, which must include measures of this type in their programmes and accord them due priority. Having done so, the Member States are then free to decide on the precise nature of their rural development projects."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples