Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2003-06-03-Speech-2-166"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20030603.6.2-166"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:translated text |
".
Mr President, Commissioner, ladies and gentlemen, when, at the beginning of this year, the Commission’s legislative proposals on the mid-term review of Agenda 2000 and the timetable for them were put before us, we were under considerable pressure of time. Parliament was meant to produce its positions by this week. The task before us seemed almost beyond our capacities. Few of us dared to believe that we would manage it. As the rapporteur responsible for the reports on the dairy sector levy and on the common organisation of the market in milk and milk products, I can say, with a great deal of satisfaction, that we have done it, and done it together.
Cooperation at an early stage across group boundaries, which was our experience particularly with the milk sector, has finally paid off. From the very outset, I was able, in the drafts of my reports, to take into account the concerns of my colleagues in the Group of the European People’s Party (Christian Democrats) and European Democrats, as well as those of the other groups, which meant that there was a manageable number of amendments in the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development, and that the result that you have before you is coherent and consistent. Finally, the small number of amendments tabled in the plenary is evidence of general agreement, which was also reflected in the outstanding voting results in the Agriculture Committee. This is a splendid piece of work, for which I would like to thank most warmly all those Members of this House who have worked with me with this end in mind, showing goodwill, expertise and a willingness to compromise. I also wish to thank the Committee’s secretariat, which was a valued and ever-reliable support to me in my task as it did its coordinating work behind the scenes.
The Commission has presented a package of legislation on the dairy sector, and it is one that we very much welcome, including as it does such measures as the retention of the milk quota up to 2015. In order, though, to achieve its goal of bringing the dairy sector into line with WTO requirements, the Commission is offering instruments which – taken as a whole – are highly problematic: further price reductions, quotas raised still further, and the decoupling of milk production from milk premiums. What would be the consequences of such a course of action? If the massive price reductions were implemented as planned hand in hand with extended quotas, the milk quota system would in fact be nullified. In particular, small and medium-sized rural dairies in disadvantaged areas would find it practically impossible to cope with the competition, at which point the decoupling of the sector would do the rest, so that milk production would move very rapidly from grassland and disadvantaged areas to what is termed prime land. The adverse structural, social and environmental consequences in the areas affected could not then be ignored. In order to make dairy farming in the EU more competitive and more efficient, the Commission is frustrating, by means of its proposals, its own structural and rural development policies. It makes no sense, though, to destroy today businesses and jobs, especially in disadvantaged, structurally weak areas, whether this be done out of anticipatory obedience to the WTO or, conceivably, for ideological reasons, since we will, tomorrow, have to replace or create anew these jobs, with a great deal of effort and expense to public funds, using rural development programmes to do it…
The need for a gradual transition if such conflicting objectives are to be avoided in this area is therefore plain to see. With the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development, then, I have taken another approach. We aim to maintain sustainable and extensive production of milk, especially on grassland. What is clear is that, if dairy farming dies out on grassland and in disadvantaged areas, a great deal of public effort will be needed to maintain the landscape in the state that we all know today, as a valued place in which to relax and go on holiday. This makes the retention of the milk quota system until 2015 right and vital, and – as we want to make reliable policies – let there be no bringing forward of what was decided under Agenda 2000.
The price reductions decided on in Agenda 2000, some of which have already been implemented, have already given us more room to manoeuvre in the WTO. This room to manoeuvre was originally to have been made use of in the negotiations. If the outcome of those negotiations is that further price reductions really are necessary, my reports will give an indication of what further price reductions might be like.
In order to keep the dairy and cereals sectors on a par – at least to some extent – we are calling for a higher level of compensation for price reductions. The 50 cents proposed are definitely inadequate.
The WTO’s argument is irrelevant to the extension of quotas unless the Commission were to have as its declared objective the use of these measures to exert renewed pressure on prices. No representative of the Commission, though, has put it to me in these terms, so we urge that we meet the quota-hungry Member States halfway on this by introducing a flexible system. This means a ‘yes’ to increased quotas, but it must be dependent on the market situation.
We propose that a gradual approach be taken to decoupling. At this point in time, there should be none. The Agriculture Committee proposes that this be reconsidered in 2008, when experience will have been gained of decoupling, re-coupling, or simplification in other sectors. We will then be able to have some idea of the likely effects and consequences and fashion the instrument accordingly.
It is important, as regards both the milk reports, that a similarly good voting result should be achieved in the plenary as in the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development. Let us join together in sending a clear signal to the Council and the Commission. Sustainable land use can take the place of much environmental, social and regional policy. The European Union is committed to extensive and sustainable agriculture, at the heart of which, in many of Europe’s regions, is the dairy industry."@en1
|
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples