Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-03-14-Speech-4-026"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20020314.2.4-026"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Madam President, I too welcome the work done by Mr Cunha in the Committee on Agriculture. As an aside, it was stated that Andalusia is a very rich agricultural area. I have to say that I would be delighted with an income from agriculture as high as that enjoyed by the citizens represented by Mrs Auroi, and so would my Andalusian constituents.
I side with those in favour of retaining aid to farmers, although I do not smoke myself and advise everyone not to take it up or to stop. I believe it would be a mistake to reduce the cultivation of tobacco or do away with it altogether. My reasons are that this would entail a high social cost and that no suitable alternative crops have been identified. It should also be remembered that those who advocate cutting off aid to the sector on the grounds of health protection fail to take into account that subsidising European production would have no impact on consumption. This is because the European Union imports 70% of its raw tobacco. Nonetheless, we have already been presented with a proposal providing for gradual elimination of tobacco without the relevant studies to ensure alternative sources of income following replacement of this crop.
There are no such alternative sources of income at present. Discussion of reform can only begin when the results of assessment of the COM in tobacco are available, not in any event before 2003. The Commission aims to replace agricultural research with action to support the development of specific initiatives encouraging tobacco producers to change to other crops and engage in alternative economic activities generating employment. Deductions from the producers’ premiums are to be implemented progressively starting in 2004.
The Community Fund financed by deductions from the subsidies has been underused. This was due to serious mismanagement by the Commission. If the latter handled the existing budget so badly, I have grave misgivings as to whether it would do better with a significantly larger sum. It should be recalled that there have hardly been any calls to tender so far.
The Fund must of course continue to serve its purpose and pursue research into varieties more suited to demand and causing as little harm as possible. Obviously it must also investigate alternative uses for raw tobacco and its environmental impact. Increased deductions should not be an excuse for covert reductions of the producers’ premiums.
I should like to conclude by emphasising the important social and economic role played by tobacco cultivation. It calls for a sizeable workforce on family plots. The debate on tobacco and public health should not therefore be restricted to the agricultural context, targeting the weakest link in the chain of tobacco production."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples