Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2001-04-04-Speech-3-301"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2001-04-04"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Support system for producers of arable crops2
dcterms:Language	"de"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20010404.13.3-301"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2001-04-04-Speech-3-3022
lpv:speaker	lp:Elisabeth Jeggle2
lpv:spokenAs	member; AGRI (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 unknown; Christlich Demokratische Union Deutschlands (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 member; EPP-ED (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 substitute; Committee on Regional Policy, Transport and Tourism (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 member; Delegations to the parliamentary cooperation committees and delegations for relations with Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Mongolia (1999-10-06--2002-01-14)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, in the present proposal for the amendment of the Regulation establishing a support system for producers of certain arable crops, the Commission is pursuing the aim of encouraging environmental agriculture by means of the cultivation of fodder legumes on land set aside. This, however, is only to be possible for holdings which, with their production, are taking part in Regulation (EEC) No 2092/91 and which, in effect, are organic holdings. This is where our criticism begins, and for the most part the Council also sees it the same way. I want to emphasise this at this point. We are calling for not only organic holdings to be permitted to cultivate legumes on land set aside, but, against the background of BSE and foot-and-mouth, all livestock holdings. In this way, the many livestock holdings could receive a small compensation for the sometimes truly dramatic financial losses caused by BSE and foot-and-mouth. At least, however, in addition to the organic holdings, holdings should be considered which are participating in the agri-environment programmes, that is to say holdings which, within the framework of Regulation 1257/99, are participating in national environment programmes approved by the committee. The argument put forward by the committee in this connection, that the instrument of set aside would be given up with our amendments, is surely incomprehensible. It is clear to every farmer affected by BSE and foot-and-mouth and who is participating in these support measures that the EU is giving no new cause for celebration here. Rather, he will be grateful for it as a very clever interpretation of the little room to manoeuvre which remains to us in the present miserable situation for livestock holdings. Secondly, the committee itself reports that the desired restoration of the soil’s fertility will be achieved by the cultivation of fodder legumes. It is incomprehensible why only organically farmed holdings should profit from this recycling. After the animal meal fodder ban, it just makes sense to encourage the cultivation of highly protein-rich legumes. We will need far more of them than we are at present producing. The introduction of soya may pay off. If, however, we are taking sustainable agriculture seriously, we must take a step forwards here."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph