Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2002-06-12-Speech-3-172"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20020612.5.3-172"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
"Mr President, Mr President-in-Office of the Council and Commissioner, I believe that we should sometimes stop and pinch ourselves and reflect upon how privileged those of us are who are permitted to work on European issues right now. To unify Europe and finally incorporate the countries of central Eastern Europe into the European Union is the historic challenge of our time.
The President-in-Office of the Council is right in saying that enlargement is one thing and agricultural policy another. There are, however, connections, and we believe it is a matter of urgency for both EU and candidate countries directly to begin to discuss how a future agricultural policy might look. We are all aware that it must be changed, and such discussions would perhaps facilitate acceptance by the candidate countries.
I believe that the EU, in accordance with the discussions now being conducted at the World Food Conference and in accordance with the WTO’s ambitions, has a crucial interest in being able to sell its food on a functioning world market. Hopefully, it will then be possible to exploit its production potential.
I want to make a recommendation to the Council and the Commission: negotiate with knowledge, sensitivity and love, and we shall achieve a good result.
Sometimes, I see this as unreal because, for a very long time, I had got used to there being a dividing line running right through Europe, which would remain in place. Fortunately, it did not do so. Now, however, I feel that unification is taking an unduly long time, with many years already having passed since the dividing line disappeared. As Mr Brok said, there is no longer any excuse for delaying enlargement.
To provide their people with safe and nutritious food has always been an important ambition for all states. That is why agricultural and food policies play such a large role, both in areas of the world with surpluses and in those with shortages.
Agricultural policy is a knotty problem in the accession negotiations. The EU cannot reasonably meet all the wishes of the candidate countries. In the negotiations, we must, however, create a feeling of understanding and community within the framework of the EU’s long-term economic and political commitments.
The Council (General Affairs) was unable to achieve agreement on the issue of direct payments. I wish to take this opportunity to state clearly that I do not support the Swedish Government’s view, but am in favour of the Commission’s policy when it comes to the phasing-in of direct payments.
One Paragraph of our report proposes that the Commission should provide help and support on the issue of Romania’s and Bulgaria’s continued work with a view to accession. I would therefore thank the Commissioner for having already begun by explaining that this should be done. It is very pleasing when we are agreed in our endeavours.
We are also addressing a number of points which may perhaps make the negotiations a little smoother. It is possible that the Commission has already come up with these ideas. Regarding the establishment of quotas and volumes, we believe that, within the framework of the quotas and volumes proposed by the Commission, account should be taken of the candidate countries’ situation during the reference period, their production potential and their consumption trends.
We also believe that those countries which, for various reasons, have exposed their agriculture to a tough market in recent years should not be treated unfairly. In countries with low direct payments prior to accession, it should moreover be possible to provide the option of exceeding that level. I do not say that that should apply generally, because it is sensible not to allow any increase over and above previous levels. There should nonetheless be an opportunity and scope for discussion about the option of exceeding that level in those cases in which the economy permits this and in which competitiveness will not be harmed.
Given that the candidate countries are undergoing major readjustments, it would also be appropriate after a little while to review how the common agricultural policy is to be applied."@en1
|
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples