Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-02-28-Speech-3-075"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2001-02-28"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Draft SAB 1/20012
dcterms:Language	"fi"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20010228.5.3-075"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2001-02-28-Speech-3-0762
lpv:speaker	lp:Kyösti Virrankoski2
lpv:spokenAs	unknown; Suomen Keskusta (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 substitute; Delegation to the EU-Bulgaria Joint Parliamentary Committee (1999-09-29--2002-01-14)3 member; BUDG (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 substitute; CONT (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 member; Delegation to the EU-Estonia Joint Parliamentary Committee (1999-09-29--2002-01-14)3 member; ELDR (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, the Supplementary and Amending Budget makes pitiful reading. It literally means that EUR 700 million in EU funds is to go up in smoke, as this is the amount to be spent on beef that is at risk and that will have to be destroyed. The worst thing about all this is, however, that the BSE crisis is seriously threatening the equilibrium of the EU budget. Some of the expenditure in this supplementary budget is being financed on the rather optimistic supposition that considerable savings are to be had from the euro-dollar exchange rate. This is probably mostly wishful thinking. But the most serious aspect of the issue is that the margin for the Financial Perspective is in danger of being used up entirely. After the proposal has gone through, the margin will only be EUR 506 million, or just over 1% of the total amount in that category. Nevertheless, we may assume with a degree of certainty that the demand for beef exported outside the EU will rocket. Consumption has dropped in many of the large countries, which is reflected in increased stocks. As, at least for a few years, we can expect consumption to fall permanently, we should aim to release these stocks for export. Within the framework of the current Financial Perspective, there is no longer any scope for doing this. As a result, there is fear that other agricultural expenditure will be cut. That might well mean a cut in income for individual farmers, in other words, individual farmers will have to pay for the crisis. We have to remember that the BSE crisis was not caused by farmers. They used the legally approved feed in good faith, although it turned out to be toxic. For that reason, we all have to share the responsibility and not put the burden of that responsibility on one part of the population. I am in favour of dividing the costs in half."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph