Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-03-01-Speech-4-065"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20010301.3.4-065"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"I have today chosen to vote in favour of Parliament’s report, the Haug report, on the Council’s Draft Supplementary and Amending Budget 1/2001 in view, for example, of the BSE crisis, despite the fact that other Swedish Social Democrats are voting against it.
This difference of approach does
reflect different attitudes to agricultural policy. On the contrary, we are in complete agreement about the need for a radical reform including, in the longer term, a greater acceptance of responsibility by the Member States for those costs that arise as a consequence of BSE and other crises. This view is also expressed in the report.
The background to our voting differently is, rather, the fact that I participated in the handling of this matter in the Committee on Budgets and do not see any possibility of influencing agricultural policy by voting ‘no’ today. Nor will the Supplementary Budget lead to the Budget’s being overstepped, but only to those margins which are under the Budget ceiling being reduced.
What is more, this is a decision on which Parliament does not have the right of codecision – which is in itself a matter for discussion that is called into question in the report. A ‘no’ vote today would not, therefore, lead to any real change but only to delays. It would delay making available those resources required for the testing and destruction of cattle in the wake of the BSE crisis, as well as delay extending the mandate of the European Reconstruction Bureau in Kosovo/Serbia to include Montenegro, as referred to in the second part of this Supplementary and Amending Budget.
Parliament’s report makes clear demands for a change in agricultural policy, entirely along the same lines presented by myself and other Social Democratic and Liberal MEPs in an article in Wednesday’s
. Those demands will now be pushed hard by Parliament, something which all we Swedish Social Democrats applaud.
We are not therefore concerned here with substantially different views of agricultural policy. On the contrary, I feel very sympathetic towards the voting intentions of my Swedish Social Democratic colleagues. We differ only in our view of what can be achieved by voting against this practical report."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
"Göteborgs-Posten"1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples